Showing posts with label surveillance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label surveillance. Show all posts

Saturday, January 8, 2011

Former Community Pisser-Offer Pressing for Internet IDs


Via cbsnews.com:

STANFORD, Calif. - President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

It's "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said.

That news, first reported by CNET, effectively pushes the department to the forefront of the issue, beating out other potential candidates including the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security. The move also is likely to please privacy and civil liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.

The announcement came at an event today at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, where U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Schmidt spoke.

The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, which Locke said will be released by the president in the next few months. (An early version was publicly released last summer.)

"We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."

The Commerce Department will be setting up a national program office to work on this project, Locke said.

Details about the "trusted identity" project are unusually scarce. Last year's announcement referenced a possible forthcoming smart card or digital certificate that would prove that online users are who they say they are. These digital IDs would be offered to consumers by online vendors for financial transactions.

Schmidt stressed today that anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet. "I don't have to get a credential if I don't want to," he said. There's no chance that "a centralized database will emerge," and "we need the private sector to lead the implementation of this," he said.

Inter-agency rivalries to claim authority over cybersecurity have exited ever since many responsibilities were centralized in the Department of Homeland Security as part of its creation nine years ago. Three years ago, proposals were were circulating in Washington to transfer authority to the secretive NSA, which is part of the U.S. Defense Department.

In March 2009, Rod Beckstrom, director of Homeland Security's National Cybersecurity Center, resigned through a letter that gave a rare public glimpse into the competition for budgetary dollars and cybersecurity authority. Beckstrom said at the time that the NSA "effectively controls DHS cyber efforts through detailees, technology insertions," and has proposed moving some functions to the agency's Fort Meade, Md., headquarters.

Friday, May 14, 2010

More Nanny State Nonsense

Via CNSNews.com:
A bill introduced this month in Congress would put the federal and state governments in the business of tracking how fat, or skinny, American children are.

States receiving federal grants provided for in the bill would be required to annually track the Body Mass Index of all children ages 2 through 18. The grant-receiving states would be required to mandate that all health care providers in the state determine the Body Mass Index of all their patients in the 2-to-18 age bracket and then report that information to the state government. The state government, in turn, would be required to report the information to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for analysis.

The Healthy Choices Act--introduced by Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee--would establish and fund a wide range of programs and regulations aimed at reducing obesity rates by such means as putting nutritional labels on the front of food products, subsidizing businesses that provide fresh fruits and vegetables, and collecting BMI measurements of patients and counseling those that are overweight or obese.
You will find the rest at this link.

One common trait among virtually all totalitarian governments throughout history is the idea that children belong to the state rather than the parents.

I see this as just one more lurch in that direction.


(h/t: Drudge)

Saturday, February 27, 2010

ObamaCare: Instrument of Tyranny

I almost feel sorry for those among us who believe there are people up in Washington that actually care about their health care. Oh sure, there might be a few, but I bet you could fit them all in a phone booth with room to spare.

ObamaCare really is nothing more than HillaryCare, revised, regurgitated, massaged, and stroked. The hideous consequences of its passage will be no different, as it will ultimately result in the federal government running our nation's health care system in its entirety.

This has been the goal of the left for nearly ten decades. If we have any chance at all of keeping America a free nation, that cannot be allowed to happen, as once the federal government takes control, they will quite literally have us by the proverbial short hairs, and will thenceforth and forevermore have near total control of our lives.

It would be the sort of tyranny that would have given the average NAZI a major woody, as they had nowhere near the technology that exists today.

Via Kyle-Anne Shiver at biggovernment.com:
For the past several months, I have been working with an appointed member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), the sub-committee on health and technology. My contact on the health and technology sub-committee was privy to conversations, which when related to me, literally caused shivers down my spine.

Every single detail in my opening paragraphs of this article were actually discussed in this committee and seen as a good for the future of American society. Only a scientifically controlled populace, according to these gurus of population and health control, can survive. These scientists see their mission as one of absolute control over even the most private aspects of human life.

Not since the aftermath of WWII — when the ends of the scientific-progressive state were revealed to the world in vivid pictures of the Nazi death camps — have progressives dared to raise their heads in America to such a degree as they are now, under the leadership of Obama’s science guru, John Holdren. Holdren, early in his career, declared himself a Malthusian scientist and has, regretfully, never recanted, nor substantially altered his worldview. In Holdren’s mind, as revealed in confirmation testimony, only his numbers have been off in the past, not his conclusions on the necessity of scientific control as a societal good.

You will find the entire article here.

I bet you want see this in the New York Times or the Washington Post.

Scared yet?

Feds Move to Increase Internet Control

As I have noted previously, the federal government, under the guise of "cybersecurity," is moving toward taking increasing control of the Internet. That effort is now being aided by legislation currently being crafted by Sens. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine).

Via thehill.com (emphasis mine):
According to an aide familiar with the proposal, the bill includes a mandate for federal agencies to prepare emergency response plans in the event of a massive, nationwide cyberattack.
The president would then have the ability to initiate those network contingency plans to ensure key federal or private services did not go offline during a cyberattack of unprecedented scope, the aide said.

[...]

Privacy groups are nonetheless likely to take some umbrage at Rockefeller and Snowe's latest effort, an early draft of which leaked late last year.

When early reports predicted the cybersecurity measure would allow the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency," online privacy groups said they felt that would endow the White House with overly ambiguous and far-reaching powers to regulate the Internet.
You will find the entire article at this link.

Given that the Internet has become such an integral part of life in America, and realizing that a determined cyberattack could severely damage our nation, I am not suggesting that the federal government has no role in this area. After all, defending this nation is priority #1 for the federal government.

What I am concerned about is government abuse, given that we hear more and more about abuses of power being carried out by government agents all the time, and not necessarily those employed by the feds.

I am not all that comfortable with this kind of power being put in the hands of one person, regardless of who they are, and that goes double, or even triple, given who is residing in the White House at the moment.

Somewhere a line needs to be drawn between defending cyberspace and protecting the privacy and freedoms we are constitutionally guaranteed, yet I freely admit I am not exactly sure where that line needs to be placed. I am, however, quite sure I don't want the likes of Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe being the ones to draw it.

Sadly, this crucial issue hasn't gotten anywhere near the play in the public arena that it should, given the serious implications involved.

Hopefully that will change as this legislation makes its way though congress.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

A Notepad Mea Culpa Regarding the A.C.L.U.

I have to admit that I am not a real big fan of the A.C.L.U. I understand what they claim to be, but they have always seemed to me somewhat biased and selective when it comes to speaking out in defense of certain individuals or groups. My sense has always been, with a few notable exceptions, they tend to lean a little too far to the left for my comfort, but that is not to say they don't get it right on occasion.

Back on February 10th, I posted this article about the feds and police spying on pro-lifers in Wisconsin, and in which I wrote the following:
I doubt we will hear so much as a peep out of the A.C.L.U., either. Of course, we all know if George W. Bush were still in the White House and the feds were investigating, say, C.A.I.R., the people at the ACLU, among other lefty-oriented organizations, would be spinning on their eyebrows and spitting nails over it.
Apparently I was a little hasty in condemning the ACLU for its "lack of action" in this matter, as this comment was posted by Chris Ahmuty of the ACLU of Wisconsin:

Anonymous said...

Dear Dave,
The ACLU objected to this instance of domestic spying the day Wisc. Pro Life issued their media release. Below is our tweet with a link to the AP story in which we condemn the govt. And we have not stopped here. There is a lot going on which might surprise you.

"ACLU WI asks are the feds spying on you? http://bit.ly/9xBHvf "

Chris Ahmuty, ED
ACLU of Wisconsin

The link provided by Mr. Ahmuty lead to this Wisconsin State Journal story:
It concluded the report was unlikely to "have any impact on civil liberties or civil rights" given its limited dissemination. But anti-abortion groups and the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin on Monday both criticized the federal government's collection of information on law-abiding protesters.
You will find the whole story here.

I hope the attention this matter has generated will cause the DHS, and other law enforcement agencies, to consider their actions carefully the next time around. After all, our federal government has, in a sense, acquired the power of life and death over us, and power of that nature needs to be watched closely. Very closely.

-And it matters not whether the people running said government have a "D" or and "R" behind their names.

I also hope the scrutiny will result in those responsible for this hideous incident to be called on the carpet, but that is probably asking a bit much given the current environment in D.C.

Ed. note: The Notepad thanks Mr. Ahmuty for pointing its error out, and for teaching this blogger a lesson.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

The Obamanistas Want To Track Your Cell Phone

Via CNET.com (emphasis mine):
Two years ago, when the FBI was stymied by a band of armed robbers known as the "Scarecrow Bandits" that had robbed more than 20 Texas banks, it came up with a novel method of locating the thieves.

FBI agents obtained logs from mobile phone companies corresponding to what their cellular towers had recorded at the time of a dozen different bank robberies in the Dallas area. The voluminous records showed that two phones had made calls around the time of all 12 heists, and that those phones belonged to men named Tony Hewitt and Corey Duffey. A jury eventually convicted the duo of multiple bank robbery and weapons charges.

Even though police are tapping into the locations of mobile phones thousands of times a year, the legal ground rules remain unclear, and federal privacy laws written a generation ago are ambiguous at best. On Friday, the first federal appeals court to consider the topic will hear oral arguments (PDF) in a case that could establish new standards for locating wireless devices.

In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records" that show where a mobile device placed and received calls.

You will find the entire article at this link.

It appears our Constitution is about to be shat upon yet again by the federal government, and the 4th Amendment thereof may be about to take in right in the neck.

Just like CARNIVORE and ECHELON, I doubt we will be hearing much from the left over this outrage. After all, one of their own is currently in the White House, so that makes this sort of nonsense acceptable in their twisted way of thinking.

Of course, if George W. Bush was still POTUS, these very same hypocrites would be spinning on their eyebrows and spitting nails, while accusing GWB of being everything but a child of God.

Understand, I have no problem with law enforcement using available technology to track real criminals, particularly those who pose a danger to innocents, but they at least should have to obtain a warrant to do so. I would even support a streamlined process to speed up the process, but only if it is very tightly controlled.

Obviously our system of privacy laws has a very long way to go before it catches up with rapidly advancing technologies. This is not a little dangerous to those of us who believe in our right to privacy and the 4th Amendment, as government could get away with a lot of shenanigans in the interim.

It's even more of a concern when you take into consideration the decidedly totalitarian leanings of those currently in power, and who seem to often operate is if the Constitution does not apply to them.

Stay tuned, because this hideous story is far from over.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

DHS & Police Illegally Investigate Pro-Lifers in Wisconsin

Via LifeNews.com:
Obama Administration Admits It Wrongly Tracked Abortion Groups in Wisconsin

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
February 8
, 2010

Email RSS Print

Madison, WI (LifeNews.com) -- The Department of Homeland Security admitted today that it improperly conducted a threat assessment on pro-life and pro-abortion groups in Wisconsin. The assessment came before an expected rally last year in response to the University of Wisconsin Hospital board decided to allow abortions.

In February 2009, pro-life advocates planned to protest the hospital's decision to open up a new Madison Surgery Center doing abortions.

The Associated Press reported today that the department said in a memo that it "destroyed all of the copies of the assessment after an internal review found it violated intelligence gathering guidelines about 'protest groups which posed no threat to homeland security.'"

AP indicated the assessment was reportedly only shared with the director of Wisconsin's intelligence-sharing center and local police in Middleton, Wisconsin, the site of the rally.

Today, a pro-life organization in Wisconsin informed LifeNews.com of its concerns.

In response to an open records request by the Alliance Defense Fund and Pro-Life Wisconsin, the Middleton Police Department and the Wisconsin Department of Justice, along with the Department of Homeland Security all refused on February 4 to release copies of the threat assessment.

Pro-Life Wisconsin officials told LifeNews.com that the assessment was "inappropriately shared" and should never have targeted pro-life groups.

“The majority of Americans identify themselves as pro-life, and the Middleton Police Department has shown they are out of touch with this peaceful majority,” said Peggy Hamill, state director of the pro-life group. “Pro-lifers are not a minority of the population, nor are they second-class citizens. We refuse to let our First Amendment rights be silenced.”

A few months later in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office for Civil Rights concluded the investigation was an improper use of department resources.

The conclusion said the department inappropriately directed against activities protected by the First Amendment, in which law enforcement inappropriately engaged in “the collection, retention and dissemination of U.S. person information regarding protest groups which posed no threat to homeland security and… violated [DHS] Guidelines.”

Hamill said DHS destroyed its copies of the report, but the Middleton Police Department retained its copy.

In January 2010 the Alliance Defense Fund, on behalf of Wisconsin pro-life advocates, asked the Middleton Police Department for a copy of the report pursuant to Wisconsin’s open records laws.

The Middleton Police Department refused to disclose the report and further said that the DOJ similarly refused to authorize disclosure of the report, despite the fact that DHS had already determined that the report was an improper investigation of freedom of speech activities.

“This move by DHS illustrates the Obama administration’s goal of silencing pro-lifers. It is disturbing that a local police department has apparently tapped into the security apparatus of the federal government to potentially obstruct free speech,” Hamill concluded.

“Last year, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano unjustly included pro-lifers in a report on domestic terrorism, and here we see her words in action," she said.
-End

You can find Steve Ertelt's original article here.

Welcome to Comrade Chairman Obama's Amerika.

If we were living in a sane world, my hope would be that heads were going to ultimately roll over this travesty, particularly that of Janet "Reno II" Napolitano, but I shan't hold my breath waiting for it to happen, as the Holder "Justice" Department has shown itself to be somewhat, a'hem, lax in enforcing the law when it involves those they support.

I doubt we will hear so much as a peep out of the A.C.L.U., either. Of course, we all know if George W. Bush were still in the White House and the feds were investigating, say, C.A.I.R., the people at the ACLU, among other lefty-oriented organizations, would be spinning on their eyebrows and spitting nails over it.

As for the State Controlled Media, they are about as close to useless as it is possible to be.

I would love to see some serious federal lawsuits brought forth over this matter, as that is probably the only way those responsible for this blatantly illegal idiocy will ever be forced to explain themselves.

Clearly we are dealing with a rogue administration that considers itself immune from constitutional scrutiny of any kind, and is not above using federal and local law enforcement agencies to try and intimidate those who actively, or even passively, oppose the hideous policies of the Obamanistas.

It does not get any more hideous than wantonly murdering unborn children, or supporting those that do.

Given Obama's actions during the campaign in attempting to use the courts to silence his detractors, this should surprise no one. It most definitely does not surprise me.

Not even a little bit.

Friday, October 23, 2009

Feds Laying Groundwork for Internet Takeover?

Read this and decide for yourself (emphasis mine):
WASHINGTON/CHICAGO, Oct 22 (Reuters) - U.S. communications regulators voted unanimously Thursday to support an open Internet rule that would prevent telecom network operators from barring or blocking content based on the revenue it generates.

The proposed rule now goes to the public for comment until Jan. 14, after which the Federal Communications Commissions will review the feedback and possibly seek more comment. A final rule is not expected until the spring of next year.

"I am pleased that there is broad agreement inside the commission that we should move forward with a healthy and transparent process on an open Internet," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said.

The vote came despite a flurry of lobbying against the net neutrality rule by telecommunications service providers like AT&T Inc (T.N), Verizon Communications Inc (VZ.N) and Qwest Communications International Inc (Q.N), which say it would strip them of the ability to manage their networks effectively and would stifle innovation and competition.

[...]

"We commend the FCC for beginning the process," said Senators Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, and Olympia Snowe, a Maine Republican, in a joint statement. They proposed a net neutrality bill in the last session of Congress.

[...]

Verizon Communications warned of unintended consequences from government rulemaking and added it is seeking "common ground" with others in the industry on policies that would apply to all.

"The Internet ecosystem is serving consumers very well, and there is no problem that requires new government regulation," said Tom Tauke, executive vice president of policy and communications.
You can read the entire Reuters.com article here.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) is having none of it, and believes this is essentially going be a sort of "Fairness Doctrine" for the Internet.
"Net neutrality, as I see it, is the fairness doctrine for the Internet," she said. The creators "fully understand what the Fairness Doctrine would be when it applies to TV or radio. What they do not want is the federal government policing how they deploy their content over the Internet and they want the ISPs to manage their networks and deploy the content however they have agreed on with ISP. They do not want a czar of the Internet to determine when they can deploy their creativity over the Internet. "They do not want a czar to determine what speeds will be available....We are watching the FCC very closely as it relates to that issue."
So are we, Rep. Blackburn.

Every time I hear the suggestion that the federal government get involved in anything, I cringe. Once you let them in, it is damn near impossible to get them out again.

The idea that the federal government should have any say in how the Internet is run is preposterous, as you can be sure their involvement in same will only deepen as time goes by. Yeah, the old slippery slope that would be.

The decidedly totalitarian leanings of the administration currently holed-up in the White House only reinforces my belief that the feds should be kept as far away from the Internet as is possible.

As far as I know, the Internet isn't broken, and even if it was, the last entity on Earth I want to see "fix" it is the federal government.

(h/t: Drudge)

Photocredit: scaredmonkeys.com

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Obamagandist Gets Grilled By....CNN's Howard Kurtz?

Last Tuesday I noted former reporterette Linda Douglass was telling some whoppers for the White House about ObamaCare. Well, here she is again, blatantly lying about Obama's position on the single payer system for heath care we all know Obama supports:


I will congratulate Howard Kurtz here for making sure this lying propagandist left the studio with some grill marks on her behind, as I wasn't expecting him to ask any tough questions to someone so close to the One.

Here, she is admitting that the White House's "snitch" program is illegal:


This woman's lies are so brazen that I am guessing that, somewhere in the hottest pits of Hell itself, Joseph Goebbels is smiling broadly.

The Obamanistas are getting creepier with each passing hour.

Saturday, July 11, 2009

Big Brother is Watching You: Pervasive Surveillance Under Obama

The DHS-NSA-AT&T "Cybersecurity" Partnership

by Tom Burghardt

Under the rubric of cybersecurity, the Obama administration is moving forward with a Bush regime program to screen state computer traffic on private-sector networks, including those connecting people to the Internet, The Washington Post revealed July 3.

That project, code-named "Einstein," may very well be related to the much-larger, ongoing and highly illegal National Security Agency (NSA) communications intercept program known as "Stellar Wind," disclosed in 2005 by The New York Times.

There are several components to Stellar Wind, one of which is a massive data-mining project run by the agency. As USA Today revealed in 2006, the "National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth."

Under the current program, Einstein will be tied directly into giant NSA data bases that contain the trace signatures left behind by cyberattacks; these immense electronic warehouses will be be fed by information streamed to the agency by the nation's telecommunications providers.

AT&T, in partnership with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the NSA will spearhead the aggressive new initiative to detect malicious attacks launched against government web sites--by continuing to monitor the electronic communications of Americans.

This contradicts President Obama's pledge announcing his administration's cybersecurity program on May 29. During White House remarks Obama said that the government will not continue Bush-era surveillance practices or include "monitoring private sector networks or Internet traffic."

Called the "flagship system" in the national security state's cyber defense arsenal, The Wall Street Journal reports that Einstein is "designed to protect the U.S. government's computer networks from cyberspies." In addition to cost overruns and mismanagement by outsourced contractors, the system "is being stymied by technical limitations and privacy concerns." According to the Journal, Einstein is being developed in three stages:

Einstein 1: Monitors Internet traffic flowing in and out of federal civilian networks. Detects abnormalities that might be cyber attacks. Is unable to block attacks.

Einstein 2: In addition to looking for abnormalities, detects viruses and other indicators of attacks based on signatures of known incidents, and alerts analysts immediately. Also can't block attacks.

Einstein 3: Under development. Based on technology developed for a National Security Agency program called Tutelage, it detects and deflects security breaches. Its filtering technology can read the content of email and other communications. (Siobhan Gorman, "Troubles Plague Cyberspy Defense," The Wall Street Journal, July 3, 2009)
As readers of Antifascist Calling are well aware, like other telecom grifters, AT&T is a private-sector partner of NSA and continues to be a key player in the agency's driftnet spying on Americans' electronic communications. In 2006, AT&T whistleblower Mark Klein revealed in a sworn affidavit, that the firm's Internet traffic that runs through fiber-optic cables at the company's Folsom Street facility in San Francisco was routinely provided to the National Security Agency.

Using a device known as a splitter, a complete copy of Internet traffic that AT&T receives--email, web browsing requests and other electronic communications sent by AT&T customers, was diverted onto a separate fiber-optic cable connected to the company's SG-3 room, controlled by the agency. Only personnel with NSA clearances--either working for, or on behalf of the agency--have access to this room.

Klein and other critics of the program, including investigative journalist James Bamford who reported in his book, The Shadow Factory, believe that some 15-30 identical NSA-controlled rooms exist at AT&T facilities scattered across the country.

Einstein: You Don't Have to Be a Genius to Know They're Lying

But what happens next, after the data is processed and catalogued by the agency is little understood. Programs such as Einstein will provide NSA with the ability to read and decipher the content of email messages, any and all messages in real-time.

While DHS claims that "the new program will scrutinize only data going to or from government systems," the Post reports that a debate has been sparked within the agency over "uncertainty about whether private data can be shielded from unauthorized scrutiny, how much of a role NSA should play and whether the agency's involvement in warrantless wiretapping during George W. Bush's presidency would draw controversy."

A "Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for EINSTEIN 2" issued by DHS in May 2008, claims the system is interested in "malicious activity" and not personally identifiable information flowing into federal networks.

While DHS claims that "the risk associated with the use of this computer network security intrusion detection system is actually lower than the risk generated by using a commercially available intrusion detection system," this assertion is undercut when the agency states, "Internet users have no expectation of privacy in the to/from address of their messages or the IP addresses of the sites they visit."

When Einstein 3 is eventually rolled-out, Internet users similarly will "have no expectation of privacy" when it comes to the content of their communications.

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano told reporters, "we absolutely intend to use the technical resources, the substantial ones, that NSA has." Seeking to deflect criticism from civil libertarians, Napolitano claims "they will be guided, led and in a sense directed by the people we have at the Department of Homeland Security."

Despite protests to the contrary by securocrats, like other Bush and Obama "cybersecurity" initiatives the Einstein program is a backdoor for pervasive state surveillance. Government Computer News reported in December 2008 that Marc Rotenberg, the executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) said that "the misuse or exposure of sensitive data from such a program [Einstein] could undermine the security arguments for surveillance."

And with Internet Service Providers routinely deploying deep packet inspection tools to "siphon off requested traffic for law enforcement," tools with the ability to "inspect and shape every single packet--in real time--for nearly a million simultaneous connections" as Ars Technica reported, to assume that ISPs will protect Americans' privacy rights from out-of-control state agencies is a foolhardy supposition at best.

The latest version of the system will not be rolled-out for at least 18 months. But like the Stellar Wind driftnet surveillance program, communications intercepted by Einstein 3 will be routed through a "monitoring box" controlled by NSA and their civilian contractors.

Under a classified pilot program approved during the Bush administration, NSA data and hardware would be used to protect the networks of some civilian government agencies. Part of an initiative known as Einstein 3, the plan called for telecommunications companies to route the Internet traffic of civilian agencies through a monitoring box that would search for and block computer codes designed to penetrate or otherwise compromise networks. (Ellen Nakashima, "Cybersecurity Plan to Involve NSA, Telecoms," The Washington Post, July 3, 2009)
However, investigative journalist Wayne Madsen reported last September "that the Bush administration has authorized massive surveillance of the Internet using as cover a cyber-security multi-billion dollar project called the 'Einstein' program."

While some researchers (including this one) question Madsen's overreliance on anonymous sources and undisclosed documents, in fairness it should be pointed out that nine months before The New York Times described the NSA's secret e-mail collection database known as Pinwale, Madsen had already identified and broken the story. According to Madsen,
The classified technology being used for Einstein was developed for the NSA in conducting signals intelligence (SIGINT) operations on email networks in Russia. Code-named PINWHEEL, the NSA email surveillance system targets Russian government, military, diplomatic, and commercial email traffic and burrows into the text portions of the email to search for particular words and phrases of interest to NSA eavesdroppers. According to NSA documents obtained by WMR, there is an NSA system code-named "PINWALE."

The DNI and NSA also plan to move Einstein into the private sector by claiming the nation's critical infrastructure, by nature, overlaps into the commercial sector. There are classified plans, already budgeted in so-called "black" projects, to extend Einstein surveillance into the dot (.) com, dot (.) edu, dot (.) int, and dot (.) org, as well as other Internet domains. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has budgeted $5.4 billion for Einstein in his department's FY2009 information technology budget. However, this amount does not take into account the "black" budgets for Einstein proliferation throughout the U.S. telecommunications network contained in the budgets for NSA and DNI. (Wayne Madsen, "'Einstein' replaces 'Big Brother' in Internet Surveillance," Online Journal, September 19, 2008)
A follow-up article published in February, identified the ultra-spooky Booz Allen Hamilton firm as the developer of Pinwale, an illegal program for the interception of text communications. According to Madsen, "the system is linked to a number of meta-databases that contain e-mail, faxes, and text messages of hundreds of millions of people around the world and in the United States."

In other words both classified programs, Pinwale and Einstein, are sophisticated electronic communications surveillance projects that most certainly will train the agency's formidable intelligence assets on the American people "using as cover a cyber-security multi-billion dollar project called the 'Einstein' program," as Madsen reported.

AT&T: "No Comment"

An AT&T spokesman refused to comment on the proposals and is seeking legal protection from the state that it will not be sued for privacy breaches as a result of its participation in the new program. "Legal certification" the Post reports, "has been held up for several months as DHS prepares a contract."

NSA's involvement is critical proponents claim, because the agency has a readily-accessible database of computer codes, or signatures "that have been linked to cyberattacks or known adversaries. The NSA has compiled the cache by, for example, electronically observing hackers trying to gain access to U.S. military systems," the Post averred.

Calling NSA's cache "the secret sauce...it's the stuff they have that the private sector doesn't," is what raises alarms for privacy and civil liberties' advocates. Known as Tutelage, NSA's classified program can detect and automatically decide how to deal with malicious intrusions, "to block them or watch them closely to better assess the threat," according to the Post. "The database for the program would also contain feeds from commercial firms and DHS's U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team, administration officials said."

Jeff Mohan, AT&T's executive director for Einstein, was more forthcoming earlier this year. He told Federal News Radio: "With these services, we will provide a secure portal from the agency's infrastructure, or Intranet to the public internet. There is a technical aspect, which is routers, firewalls and that sort of thing that applies these security capabilities across that portal and looks a Internet traffic that comes from public Internet to Intranet and vice versa."

The "technical aspect" will also provide federal agencies the ability to capture, sort, read and then store Americans' private communications in huge data bases run by NSA.

Mohan said that AT&T will provide the state with "optional services such as scanning e-mail and placing filters on agency networks to keep malicious e-mail off the network as well as forensic and storage capabilities also are available through MTIPS [Managed Trusted Internet Protocol Services]."

In addition to AT&T, other private partners awarded contracts under the General Services Administration's MTIPS which has a built-in "Einstein enclave" include: Sprint, L3 Communications, Qwest, MCI, General Dynamics and Verizon, according to multiple reports published by Federal Computer Week.

Claiming that the state is "looking for malicious content, not a love note to someone with a dot-gov e-mail address," a former unnamed "senior Bush administration official" told the Post "what we're interested in is finding the code, the thing that will do the network harm, not reading the e-mail itself."

Try selling that to the tens of millions of Americans whose private communications have been illegally spied upon by the Bush and Obama administrations or leftist dissidents singled-out for "special handling" by the national security state's public-private surveillance partnership!

An Electronic Spider's Web

As the "global war on terror" morphs into an endless war on our democratic rights, the NSA is expanding domestic operations by "decentralizing its massive computer hubs," The Salt Lake Tribune revealed.

The agency "will build a 1-million-square-foot data center at Utah's Camp Williams," the newspaper disclosed July 1. The new facility would be NSA's third major data center. In 2007, the agency announced plans to build a second data center in San Antonio, Texas after the Baltimore Sun reported that NSA had "maxed out" the electric capacity of the Baltimore area's power grid.

The San Antonio Current reported in December, that the NSA's Texas Cryptology Center will cost "upwards of $130 million." The 470,000 square-foot-facility is adjacent to a similar center constructed by software giant Microsoft. Investigative journalist James Bamford told the Current that under current law "NSA could gain access to Microsoft's stored data without even a warrant, but merely a fiber-optic cable."

A follow-up article by The Salt Lake Tribune reported that the facility will cost upwards of $2 billion dollars and that funds have already been appropriated by the Obama administration for NSA's new data center and listening post.

The secretive agency released a statement Thursday acknowledging the selection of Camp Williams as a site for the new center and describing it as "a specialized facility that houses computer systems and supporting equipment."

Budget documents provide a more detailed picture of the facility and its mission. The supercomputers in the center will be part of the NSA's signal intelligence program, which seeks to "gain a decisive information advantage for the nation and our allies under all circumstances" according to the documents. (Matthew D. LaPlante, "New NSA Center Unveiled in Budget Documents," The Salt Lake Tribune, July 2, 2009)
Not everyone is pleased with the announcement. Steve Erickson, the director of the antiwar Citizens Education Project told the Tribune, "Finally, the Patriot Act has a home."

While the total cost of rolling-out the Einstein 3 system is classified, The Wall Street Journal reports that "the price tag was expected to exceed $2 billion." And as with other national security state initiatives, it is the American people who are footing the bill for the destruction of our democratic rights.
Tom Burghardt is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Tom Burghardt

© Copyright Tom Burghardt, Antifascist Calling..., 2009

You can view the original Global Research article here.

(ht: my friend Gio at Giovanni's World)

Sunday, May 10, 2009

The Electronic Police State Has Arrived

No, it isn't coming in 2047, or at any other time in the future.

It is here today:

In what may be the first assessment of its kind, a private company that offers a range of privacy products for computers and other technology is ranking the United States No. 6 in the world for having the most aggressive procedures for monitoring residents electronically.

The report, called The Electronic Police State, assesses the status of governmental surveillance in 52 nations around the globe for 2008.

The document was released Cryptohippie, Inc., which was set up in 2007 through the acquisition of several little-known but highly regarded providers of privacy technologies.

Not surprisingly, China and North Korea ranked No. 1 and No. 2, with Belarus and Russia following up. But the United Kingdom ranked fifth followed by the United States.

Read Bob Unruh's entire WorldNetDaily article here.

Wisconsin Court Upholds Warrant-less GPS Surveillance

Are law enforcement agencies in your state secretly tracking your vehicular movements? If you reside in the state of Wisconsin, they just might be doing exactly that.

The Chicago Tribune has reported that the Wisconsin District 4 Court of Appeals, which is made up of three judges, has ruled unanimously that law enforcement agencies in that state may place GPS tracking devices on citizen's vehicles to track their movements without first having to obtain a warrant:
As the law currently stands, the court said police can mount GPS on cars to track people without violating their constitutional rights -- even if the drivers aren't suspects.

Officers do not need to get warrants beforehand because GPS tracking does not involve a search or a seizure, Judge Paul Lundsten wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel based in Madison.
You will find the whole story here.

As a libertarian, I find this court's ruling to be contrary to everything I believe in as a freedom-loving American citizen. No government agency should be allowed to place a tracking device on your vehicle without first going before a judge and making a case for it.

I realize we are moving more toward a surveillance society, particularly in the more urbanized areas of the country, with traffic cameras, red light cameras, cameras on public sidewalks, even cameras in the local car wash, and I realize you can be tracked via your cell phone as well, but secretly placing tracking devices on citizen's vehicles without probable cause is going way beyond the pale.

This is once ruling I hope to see go all the way to the United States Supreme Court and be tossed, before this lunacy starts to catch on in other places.

Assuming that it hasn't already.
When liberty is taken away by force it can be restored by force. When it is relinquished voluntarily by default it can never be recovered. -Dorothy Thompson