[iwar] [fc:Privacy,-Security-Trade-Offs-Reassessed]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-09-13 03:33:20


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-1830-1000377267-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:36:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 18741 invoked by uid 510); 13 Sep 2001 10:34:58 -0000
Received: from n23.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.73) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 13 Sep 2001 10:34:58 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-1830-1000377267-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.54] by ck.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Sep 2001 10:34:30 -0000
X-Sender: fc@big.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_1); 13 Sep 2001 10:34:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 64659 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 10:34:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Sep 2001 10:34:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO big.all.net) (65.0.156.78) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Sep 2001 10:33:35 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by big.all.net (8.9.3/8.7.3) id DAA11926 for iwar@onelist.com; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:33:20 -0700
Message-Id: <200109131033.DAA11926@big.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:Privacy,-Security-Trade-Offs-Reassessed]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Privacy, Security Trade-Offs Reassessed Objections to Surveillance
Technology Faces New Test After Attack

By Ariana Eunjung Cha and Jonathan Krim Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, September 13, 2001; Page E01

When the FBI came knocking a year ago, asking Internet companies to
install an e-mail eavesdropping program so that they could catch
potential criminals, many executives balked.  It was, they said, an
invasion of personal privacy. 

But yesterday, when the agents came seeking information that might help
them find the perpetrators of the attacks that likely killed thousands
at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, some were willing -- even
eager -- to help out. 

"As much as I don't like the intrusive nature of online surveillance
technology, I really want to find the guys who did this," said a
security director at a mid-sized Internet access provider who asked not
to be identified because the investigation is ongoing. 

Just two days after the worst terrorist strike on U.S.  soil, some
people are reassessing the trade-offs between privacy and security. 

To some, inconveniences such as long lines at metal detectors and other
checkpoints suddenly seem tolerable.  Instead of talking about how eerie
the sight of military planes and tanks in New York and Washington is,
some are saying they find them comforting.  Surveillance cameras
monitoring public streets sound sensible. 

But others are wondering just how much freedom they would be willing to
give up.  Some worry that this week's violence will lead to an
overreaction that tramples on people's rights, such as the internment of
Japanese Americans after the attack on Pearl Harbor. 

"Yesterday changed the way we live and there's a whole new dimension in
the debate over privacy versus security," said Mike Assante, a former
Navy intelligence officer who works for Vigilinx Inc., a Parsippany,
N.J.-based group that provides online security services for companies
such as power plants and pharmaceutical makers.  "More people seem to be
willing to compromise but no one seems to have figured out just yet
what's reasonable."

Members of Congress said yesterday they want to study whether giving the
government more surveillance authority might avert such attacks in the
future. 

Both Sen.  Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, and Arizona Republican Sen.  Jon Kyl separately said
lawmakers need to consider whether the capabilities should be
strengthened.  But only as long as that reassessment should be
"consistent with constitutional freedoms at the core of our national
ideals," Leahy said yesterday. 

"The question is whether you overreact in pursuit of a handful of
terrorists and in the process change the constitutional protections of
millions of American citizens," said Joseph Turow, a professor who
specializes in privacy and new media at the University of Pennsylvania's
Annenberg School of Communication. 

Some telephone companies yesterday announced they were prepared to
expedite wiretapping requests from the FBI.  The agency, meanwhile, has
been seeking customer information and e-mail messages from Internet
service providers for some of the people on the passenger lists for the
four planes that were apparently hijacked, sources said. 

The agency declined to comment on the requests, citing its policy of not
talking about the details of open investigations.  But the country's
largest and third-largest online services, America Online Inc.  and
EarthLink Inc., confirmed that they had received requests from the
government.  Like other Internet providers, the two have generally
greeted subpoenas, court orders and the like seeking information about
their customers begrudgingly.  The language they used yesterday was
markedly more receptive. 

"We have been approached [by law enforcement officials], and we've
complied.  And we stand ready to help some more," said AOL spokesman
Nicholas Graham.  EarthLink's Dan Greenfield concurred: "EarthLink is
cooperating with government officials to get to the bottom of this
thing."

AOL, a unit of AOL Time Warner Inc., declined to comment about the
number or nature of requests, but EarthLink's Greenfield, a vice
president, said the company had received one request for what he called
an "electronic wiretap."

The two companies emphasized that the FBI had not installed Carnivore,
the nickname for a controversial e-mail eavesdropping technology that
has drawn the ire of lawmakers and consumer advocates.  They said they
were using their own technology to pull data from their systems. 

Several smaller providers located on the West Coast, however, said on
the condition of anonymity that they had agreed to allow the FBI to use
their equipment to monitor e-mail traffic.  They declined to comment on
when the eavesdropping equipment, formally known as DSC1000, would be
operational or how long it would remain up.  The system is basically a
black box that sits on an Internet provider's network that watches
communications.  Federal agents retrieve information by physically
taking a removable memory core from the system. 

Privacy advocates have been concerned about the technology's ability to
track everyone's e-mail, including innocent citizens suspected of
nothing.  The FBI has said the technology can hone in on specific
communication it needs to examine but it has not been willing to divulge
how the technology works. 

Rep.  Robert W.  Goodlatte (R-Va.) said that no new law-enforcement
initiatives should be enacted at the expense of civilian rights against
unwarranted government intrusion. 

"When the president talks about fighting back to protect our freedom,
that includes freedom from intrusion into innocent people's lives,"
Goodlatte said in an interview.  "We can't have our society go to one of
Big Brother."

But Eva Chung, a 34-year-old from Columbia, who is a mother of two young
children, said that after seeing the nightmares of the past few days,
Big Brother doesn't sound all that bad.  She said she has been grateful
for all the additional security measures she's seen introduced in the
area recently.  Rather than being frightened by the soldiers with
machine guns in front of the White House, she said she was glad they
were there. 

"I am very much for what this country was founded on, freedom and the
Bill of Rights and everything.  But when it's a matter of people's lives
and making sure we all have a nice place to live, then I would
definitely give up the privacy part to ensure the other part," Chung
said. 

© 2001 The Washington Post Company


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Secure all your Web servers now: Get your FREE Guide and learn to: DEPLOY THE LATEST ENCRYPTION,
DELIVER TRANSPARENT PROTECTION, and More!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/k0k.gC/nT7CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-09-29 21:08:42 PDT