Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Narus Develops Social Media Sleuth

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the nowhere-to-hide dept.

Privacy 96

maximus1 writes "Narus is developing a new technology code-named Hone that can be used to identify anonymous users of social networks and Internet services. Hone can do some pretty 'scary' things, says Antonio Nucci, chief technology officer with Narus. Hone uses artificial intelligence to analyze e-mails and can link mails to different accounts, doing what Nucci calls topical analysis. 'It's going to go through a set of documents and automatically it's going to organize them in topics — I'm not talking about keywords as is done today, I'm talking about topics,' he said. That can't be done with today's technology, he said. 'If you search for fertilizers on Google ... it's going to come back with 6.5 million pages. Enjoy,' he said. 'If you want to search for non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer ... it's not even searchable.' Nucci will discuss Hone at the RSA Conference in San Francisco Friday."

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

But does it know me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31352704)

Like to know if it finds out who I am.

Re:But does it know me? (1, Offtopic)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 4 years ago | (#31352726)

Cowboy Neil?

Re:But does it know me? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31352820)

No, I'm Cowboy Neil!

Re:But does it know me? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31352902)

I'm Spartacus!

Re:But does it know me? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353024)

I'm a jungle theme!

Re:But does it know me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353604)

This was modded Insightful? I was hoping just maybe for funny, if I was lucky... but I sure never thought a play on a line from, of all things, "A Night at the Roxbury" could *EVER* be considered "insightful" ... wtf?!

Re:But does it know me? (2, Informative)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353654)

You're all insane.

Re:But does it know me? (1)

masshuu (1260516) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353882)

Your on Slashdot.

Also i still find it hard to believe someone can identify someone one else if there Anonymous. Its like trying to take a sample of piss out of the sewer, then match it up to someone who you may not even have a sample from. Yes it will identify people who aren't trying hard to hide themselves, or stupid people, but it won't identify someone who is trying to hide themselves.

Re:But does it know me? (1)

FatdogHaiku (978357) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354700)

That's exactly what they WANT you to think! The stupid people and the people that don't care, they are the great mass that is like the sewer you mention. You will be that rare individual hovering close to the sewer, but never in it... and the more stealth you employ the faster and clearer your signature develops.

Or the whole concept could just be PR to get some of that sweet, sweet intelligence agency cash...

Re:But does it know me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353992)

I'm Batman!

scare tactics (5, Insightful)

drDugan (219551) | more than 4 years ago | (#31352728)

More ridiculous terrorism scare tactics used for attention.

"If you want to search for non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer..." No, I don't. Most likely you'll find a bunch of harmless pot growers and housewives trying to grow pretty flowers. People smart enough to really harm a well run society aren't posting details on the Internet. For the rest of us, these people will just take all the money you can from selling other people's (previously) private data.

No matter how hard we try, we will not stop determined individuals from attacking any society unless we effectively remove all freedoms from the citizens. I choose freedom over safety every time. The solutions to terrorism are NOT more or better surveillance, better technology, or more war. Real solutions include primarily the creation of a society that people don't WANT to attack. The reasons people have for suicide bombing and terrorism are usually pretty damn clear: they have nothing left to lose, and someone took advantage of them to direct their hate toward the easiest, most hated target.

Well, you want to fix terrorism, then address the real reasons for hating your society; it's pretty simple, and the only thing that really works.

Stories like this, about "scary" technology advances, remind me that as technology moves forward, the essential nature of the rights and freedoms that the US used to stand for and defend are more important now than ever before.

Here's what I'd like to find: A non-tax-cheat who is also a congress member. Oh, oh, how about a politician that still has a moral compass at all? A single honest politician? Even one? Let's find non-doctors charging Medicare. Corrupt cops. Meth distributors. Human traffickers. Murderers. People who built technology just to make money using other people's personal data, and try and frame it using terrorism scare tactics. Oh wait...

Re:scare tactics (1)

Michael Kristopeit (1751814) | more than 4 years ago | (#31352748)

HOLLLARIT!

Re:scare tactics (5, Interesting)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31352790)

then address the real reasons for hating your society

That depends on what they hate you for. Some people do indeed hate people for their ideology. It's happened quite often in history. You think the Jews' problem was something other than what Hitler believed, not what the Jews believed? Or France, for that matter?

Pulling out the "terrorists just hate the US because of what the US has done" should be based on what the said terrorist has said, not based on what we think the US does wrong. Do I think the US does things wrong? Oh, definitely. But I don't think we can assume terrorists would stop hating the US if the US fixed things they did wrong. And it hasn't worked that way for a long time. Russia appeared to hate the US for a time because it saw the US as an obstruction to what Russia wanted (world communism). Hitler hated everybody because they stood in the way of what he wanted (a German/Arian world)...

But I do agree with most of your last paragraph... I wouldn't mind finding a non-tax-cheating Congress member, a "good person" politician, etc. And I'm all for lowering power abuse and crime.

Re:scare tactics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31352986)

But I don't think we can assume terrorists would stop hating the US if the US fixed things they did wrong.

No they won't. In a nutshell, we're they're goat for their ills - real or perceived. They're leaders propagate the hatred to keep themselves in power and the terrorists refuse to do any introspection to ask what part of the problem that they contribute. In the meantime, you have brilliant manipulators, such as Bin Laden, who are getting suckers to die for them and for his agenda. Brilliant.

There was a study done by the Israelis that found the most terrorists are well educated people from well to do backgrounds. That's pretty fucked up. the best analysis I ever read about the issue was in the end of "The World Is Flat".

I really really want to walk up to a terrorist's family and say that their "martyr" was a fool, a tool, and sucker who died for nothing.

Actually, I think the families of terrorists should be put in concentration camps - non of this paying them like Saudi Arabia does. THAT would put a kibosh on terrorism.

Re:scare tactics (0, Flamebait)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353056)

most terrorists are well educated people from well to do backgrounds

You know what's interesting about that statement? It's the same in the west.

Q. What types generally join the whole GreenPeace/Anti Capitalism/Freiheit fuer alle! terrorism/anti-establishment groups in the west?

A. Generally rich little brats, who have had the silver spoon thrust so deep down their throats that they don't really know what it's like to live in the real world, or to make a buck, but rather feel guilty that they happened to win on the birth lottery.

I bet you that you can find similar trends in behaviour in groups like the aforementioned, plus PETA et al, stopping short only when it's about blowing yourself up.

Suicide bombing is only a few brain washing sessions more than our "rebels" right now. A good education, PLUS the removal of this insane guilt that society feels when we are successful is what needs to be looked at to help against recruiting the next suicide bombers.

That and bankrupting terrorist groups, which seems to be working quite well.

Re:scare tactics (2, Insightful)

Watson Ladd (955755) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353438)

So what you are saying is that because people realize that they had nothing to do with their intelligence and therefore the benefits that accrue to them from it are in some sense not deserved, they should be reeducated? Or that in a world where half a billion people starved a few years in the midst of record harvests, to say that this is wrong can only come from ignorance? Should the children of ex-Nazis not have felt guilty about living in a society run by the same people as in the 1930's and 1940's? The idea that any kind of feeling for ones fellow man is the result of ignorance, that the highest expression of man's potential is greed and gluttony should strike us as a failure to know what the highest pleasures are and as an acute failure of the moral sense.

Re:scare tactics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353766)

Everything you attribute to the GP is a straw man. Straw man arguments are lies.

Re:scare tactics (1)

scot4875 (542869) | more than 4 years ago | (#31361692)

But you're not going to call out that the GP's "argument" was made up entirely of unfounded assumptions, innuendo and ad hominem name calling?

At least go for some consistency here.

--Jeremy

Re:scare tactics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354350)

Who said that greed and gluttony are the highest expression of man's potential? I don't recall seeing that at all.

You're attacking a straw man.

Re:scare tactics (1)

miceuz (754811) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355258)

Both of you, please read a manifesto of Joe Stack. Terrorism is not "3d world against US" anymore.

Re:scare tactics (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#31357008)

Q. What types generally join the whole GreenPeace/Anti Capitalism/Freiheit fuer alle! terrorism/anti-establishment groups in the west?

A. Generally rich little brats, who have had the silver spoon thrust so deep down their throats that they don't really know what it's like to live in the real world, or to make a buck, but rather feel guilty that they happened to win on the birth lottery.

You cannot equate membership of GreenPeace/Anti-capitalist groups with terrorism. That's a huge logical error.

Not sure about the UK or Europe, but here in the US if you look at actual acts or attempted acts of terror, they tend not to be committed by people of advanced education.

Timothy McVeigh -- graduated high school, all further education received was in the Army.
John Walker Lindh -- GED; no advance formal education outside of a madrassa in Pakistan.
Counterexample: Ted Kaczynski -- undergrad at Harvard, PhD from U Michigan.

But aside from these examples, it's more than a little disingenuous to equate peaceful protest with terrorist activity, which is the glaring issue in your post IMO.

Finally someone gets it (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354106)

A lot of the people who think you can reason with terrorists follow the logic that if only women didn't upset men, they wouldn't be raped.

It takes two to tango, it takes one to start a war.

If you say "I have no problem with X", then you are both extremely arrogant and sticking your head in the sand. You suggest that you are the only one who matters in this relationship. That if you don't hate them, how can they possibly hate you? It is "If I can't see them, they can't see me". A very childish way to deal with fear.

Oh, and btw, if you defend that all sorts of Muslims can strike against the US for perceived wrongs in the past, then you have given every Jew in the world the right to kill any European. Can Israel fire missiles at Germany for obvious reasons? Can native-americans start bombing American immigrants (that is you whitey) for the occupation of their homeland?

Nope, didn't think so.

Re:scare tactics (1)

stms (1132653) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354658)

Russia appeared to hate the US for a time because it saw the US as an obstruction to what Russia wanted (world communism). Hitler hated everybody because they stood in the way of what he wanted (a German/Arian world).

I'll probably be flamed for this; you can add the Shi'a hate us because we stand in the way of what they want (an Islamic world). The problem isn't that our Ideologies are wrong it's that the two conflict with each other. Therefore there are three options that I know of... 1. War!!! 2. Becoming an Islamic state. 3. Becoming a communist state, then converting the world to it (as they don't allow any religions or other Ideologies). I would be open to any other ideas.

Re:scare tactics (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31363850)

In general, that was actually my "point." I just didn't want to really specifically target Muslims, because it does not only apply to them. Currently? Yes, IMO, it does. But it seems to be a problem with humans, not a problem with only humans who believe this one particular thing for at any time in history (i.e., other belief sets have raised these sorts of fanatical we-hate-everyone-else-who-disagrees-with-us people).

Re:scare tactics (4, Insightful)

ultranova (717540) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355896)

That depends on what they hate you for. Some people do indeed hate people for their ideology. It's happened quite often in history. You think the Jews' problem was something other than what Hitler believed, not what the Jews believed? Or France, for that matter?

One of the reasons Hitler got into power in the first place was that he promised to overturn the completely unreasonable and punitive towards Germany peace treaty of WWI. One of the reasons why no one tried to stop him before it was too late was that the victors of that war had a guilty conscience over the same treaty.

And your example is flawed in other ways too. For example, Hitler didn't pick Jews arbitrarily; he picked them because they were the terrorists/commies/witches of their time, widely believed to be trying to destroy Western civilization for some vague nefarious ideological reasons. It was easy for Hitler to fan that fear, and to convince people the Jews were trying to destroy their lifestyle and would never stop, so the people needed to give him the power to deal with the problem; in other words, exactly the same shit as we are having nowadays.

Pulling out the "terrorists just hate the US because of what the US has done" should be based on what the said terrorist has said, not based on what we think the US does wrong.

Don't most of them name some specific real or perceived wrong as their motivation? Osama, for example, took exception to US troops in Middle-East.

But I don't think we can assume terrorists would stop hating the US if the US fixed things they did wrong.

They would, however, have a lot harder time recruiting people willing to die just to take Americans with them.

Mod parent up (1)

magloca (1404473) | more than 4 years ago | (#31358740)

And your example is flawed in other ways too. For example, Hitler didn't pick Jews arbitrarily; he picked them because they were the terrorists/commies/witches of their time, widely believed to be trying to destroy Western civilization for some vague nefarious ideological reasons. It was easy for Hitler to fan that fear, and to convince people the Jews were trying to destroy their lifestyle and would never stop, so the people needed to give him the power to deal with the problem; in other words, exactly the same shit as we are having nowadays.

Just for that, I'd mod you up if I had mod points. Thank you.

Re:scare tactics (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31363942)

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Yes, Hitler didn't pick Jews arbitrarily and they weren't the only ones he picked. But he also decided he wanted to conquer every other nation. That is more along the lines of what I was specifically referring to... if Islamic wackos want to have an Islamic world then they aren't going to settle for being nice to us just because they can't find something to blame us for. Human beings are amazingly adept at making up things or skewing things so that they can blame it on someone else. It happens all the time in politics in the US; I can't imagine it's a trait/skill that only happens in the "white West."

Re:scare tactics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31365820)

Osama, for example, took exception to US troops in Middle-East.

No. Osama, very specifically, tok exception to US troops in the Land of Mecca (aka Saudi Arabia). More specifically, Prince Sultan Air Base, which had been around since Gulf War I. We closed it around 2005, to very little fanfare in the popular press. But we actually did give in to one of Osama Bin Laden's top 3 complaints about the USA. Did he say thank you, or in any way "stop hating us" ? No, of course not....

Re:scare tactics (1)

Sarlin (1309837) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374412)

Go back to your cave you nit wit punk. You must be French...probably carry a white hanky in your back pocket. Grow a brain and quit making excuses for terrorists, you piece of shit.

Re:scare tactics (1)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 4 years ago | (#31358342)

Do I think the US does things wrong? Oh, definitely. But I don't think we can assume terrorists would stop hating the US if the US fixed things they did wrong

I don't think you can assume that all terrorists would stop hating the US if the US were to clean up its act in a few areas. On the other hand, it seems like a fair bet that a lot of them wouldn't hate the US quite so much.

Which could be good. You could probably get quite a lot of them to the point where, while they didn't like you very much, they really weren't upset enough about it to fly a plane into the side of building. Or strap explosives to their chest and look for an inconvenient to place to detonate themselves.

This isn't a case of "either/or". It's not "either they hate us or they don't". It's more "how many" and "how much". The right changes in behaviour could shift a lot of potential terrorists into the disgruntled-but-harmless category. That has to be a good thing, right?

Re:scare tactics (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31364002)

Yes, granted. And I am all for trying to be a nation that acts as best as possible. I am not sure, though, that the particular brand of terrorists that we are currently fighting would stop hating us. They hate Israel, they hate the West, they hate Westerners, they hate non-Islamic religions, they hate even fellow Muslims.

Think of it this way: if they are willing to kill their family members because that family member became a non-Muslim, I doubt they have as much struggle killing an infidel that never was a Muslim.

No, not all Muslims are that way; it seems very few are. I am not trying to blame all Muslims just like I don't go around calling myself, a Christian, a murderer because that's what "Christians" did in the Crusades. I will openly denounce and condemn that. I wish more Muslims openly denounced and condemned what the terrorists are doing, but that's another story, heh.

Yes, right changes in behavior shifting potential terrorists into the harmless category is a good thing, and I fully support it... depending on what "right changes in behavior" is. I mean, they would be happy if we adopted their religious laws, but I doubt we want to do that ;) What the "right changes" are is subject to democracy in the US, and thus subject to much heated debate :)

Re:scare tactics (1)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376684)

I am not sure, though, that the particular brand of terrorists that we are currently fighting would stop hating us. They hate Israel, they hate the West, they hate Westerners, they hate non-Islamic religions, they hate even fellow Muslims.

Well, yes, up to a point. I mean if you only consider those who are utterly and implacabbly consumed by hate for the US, then you'll probably find they're going to remain consumed with hate no matter what you do. I know you're not trying to condemn all muslims, but you're still assuming that all those that your are "currently fighting" are cut from the same cloth. I think that's probably a mistake.

Look at it this way: even assuming that you're correct in your depiction of current anti-US terrorists, there's a whole generation of kids growing up that haven't yet learned to hate the US. An opponent who relies on suicide bombers needs a constant supply of angry youth, or else they quickly run out of martyrs.

Re:scare tactics (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31384494)

...but you're still assuming that all those that your are "currently fighting" are cut from the same cloth. I think that's probably a mistake.

That could be. I'm not necessarily defending everything the US or any other country does, nor saying they don't make mistakes, etc. What I am saying, though, is that not doing anything - militarily/violently - against at least those that are actually consumed in this way ... well, it won't help to do nothing. Furthermore, people are easily misled. People like hating. Pick any world leader or even a corporate leader and you'll find people that hate him.

Look at it this way: even assuming that you're correct in your depiction of current anti-US terrorists, there's a whole generation of kids growing up that haven't yet learned to hate the US. An opponent who relies on suicide bombers needs a constant supply of angry youth, or else they quickly run out of martyrs.

That's quite true. Unfortunately, youth are very easily swayed and very easily will hate someone for perceived - true or not - wrongs. Example... California's recent budget cuts and the students that got so filled with hate and got so upset that they took it out on completely innocent commuters (blocking I-80 for a while; it was closed in both directions). There was one report of a student breaking a commuter's windshield. Why? The commuter had likely NOTHING to do with the decision. So they had a public "demonstration" to show their hate for the decision - and I doubt they were just displaying hate for the decision and not the deciders - and they took it out on innocent people.

If young people can be led to get that upset about something like a state budget cut affecting education, I have no doubt young people can be led to get quite upset about complete lies. Especially when you combine that with censored media and all that...

(note: I'm not trying to argue for or against the education budget cuts, only using that as an example)

Re:scare tactics (1)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 4 years ago | (#31399164)

An opponent who relies on suicide bombers needs a constant supply of angry youth, or else they quickly run out of martyrs.

That's quite true. Unfortunately, youth are very easily swayed and very easily will hate someone for perceived - true or not - wrongs

mmm... still, it's a matter of degree once again. None of those kids got annoyed enough to set off any bombs. There's a critical threshold here, and it pays to keep as many people on the "non explosive" side of it as possible.

At the end of the day, the planet's getting too small for nations to gothrowing their weight around the way the British Empire did at it's height. Travel is cheap and too many people know how to make explosive devices. The sooner we all learn to be polite to one another, the better for all concerned.

Re:scare tactics (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31401772)

I think I basically agree with you in principle, but am not sure that there aren't groups of wacko people that want to kill you that simply don't respond to polite. Thanks for the discussion though. :)

Re:scare tactics (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353180)

"No matter how hard we try, we will not stop determined individuals from attacking any society"

          Mr. Smith says "You're wrong". Mr. Wesson agrees.

"Real solutions include primarily the creation of a society that people don't WANT to attack. ''

      Yeah just like France prepping for the Nazis. They're still a force to reckon with ~snort...

"Oh, oh, how about a politician that still has a moral compass at all? A single honest politician?"

          They don't lose moral compass, they just get built in GPS. lol, oxymorons.

Re:scare tactics (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 4 years ago | (#31359274)

Mr. Smith says "You're wrong". Mr. Wesson agrees.

Mister RPG and Mister Missile beg to differ.

While defending yourself is great, that doesn't make people not want to attack you, and it won't stop a determined person, either. It just makes the determined people need bigger weapons, that they can get you with from further away. Which, incidentally, also tend to cause more damage when they're used.

The arms race with the Soviets was pointless, dangerous, environmentally damaging, and economically crippling. Now you're advocating the same thing with terrorists?

Re:scare tactics (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31365156)

Well I suppose all that may be true according to a state approved education by an unexperienced pacifist.

          Speak softly and carry a big stick. Then don't stop using it till all the hard parts are gone and nothing left but red mush and grease.

This is the way the world has run since before recorded history. Some peacenik who thinks they can change the world by holdin hands and singin "Kum Ba Yah" are just a funny accident waiting to happen.
Even pacifist Buddhists will tell you that struggling against the world is folly. I suppose that if you are threatened by a Darwinistic view of the world, then likely you are on the way out of it. Those of us willing to stay will put "preemptive strike" at the top of the grocery list and let the battle for the top of the hill begin. Lead, follow or lay down and practice being fertilizer

      Bigger is better and biggest is best.Adapt or die. If I had to choose breeding with pacifist egg sucking rats to continue the species, I would choose not to. Breed with Tyrannosaurus and you will eat tomorrow.

        The arms race with the soviets was brilliant. It put the focus of their power on showing off rather than concentrating on domestic industry which would've enabled them to eventually dominate. We suckered em and they LOST.
Yes I advocate preemptive strikes on the terrorists, thermonuclear strikes on the countries tolerating them and embargoes on Muslim nations. It may sound extreme , but better extreme than suicidally stupid as the piss poured in your ear by the pansy socialists selling out the nation. I'd rather trash the current business dealings with the world and build from here than spend another minute being pimped by a socialist government who throws in the towel and hands us over to the world to make their "white guilt" subside.
          No I don't advocate scare tactics, using a gun to scare someone only makes them come back later with a bigger gun. Use the gun in your hand and empty it into them, their friends and family.
Violent pacification is the only peace the world ever has known. You only need look at the bigger picture and larger time frames.
Get real.

Re:scare tactics (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 4 years ago | (#31422592)

No I don't advocate scare tactics, using a gun to scare someone only makes them come back later with a bigger gun. Use the gun in your hand and empty it into them, their friends and family.

Which works really well, until you realize that you have no idea who all their friends are, and you now have twice as many people as you just killed, all pissed off at you and bent on your destruction. All at the same time as you're out of ammo.

I haven't had a "state approved education." I hate government structures, politics, propaganda, power-mongering, and all the rest of that crap. My philosophy in life is pretty much Timothy Leary's statement: "Think for yourself and question authority."

But to assume that being violent will stop anyone from attacking you is beyond naive.

It may stop people who have a lot to lose. It may stop people who don't have the weaponry. But sooner or later someone so desperate that they have nothing to lose is going to come along, and they're going to have much bigger guns than you, because they were supplied by someone who had more to lose, and they're going to wipe you out.

Re:scare tactics (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31424872)

Who's outa ammo? Not me.
I like Tim too, but he failed to make any real impact in his lifetime.
If you make a good enough example of an attacker, it will serve as warning to others.
Sure, someone better ready for battle may come, the world works that way and you won't get any argument from Darwin.
To live in denial is to get taken out in the first round. I intend to be around quite a few rounds.

Re:scare tactics (1)

nick_davison (217681) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354254)

Actually, you type "fertilizer + bomb" in to google.

It still gives you 106,000 results, completely invalidating his original point about how weeding out farmers gives you a usefully small search set.

Any terrorist with half a brain is going to use euphemisms, switched words, code, etc. About all you're going to reliably turn up is a list of every school boy in America, every news agency that's ever posted a story on a bomber using fertilizer and a crackpot on a compound in Arkansas who's only a danger to himself anyway.

Re:scare tactics (1)

Virtual_Raider (52165) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354630)

Actually, you type "fertilizer + bomb" in to google.

It still gives you 106,000 results, completely invalidating his original point about how weeding out farmers gives you a usefully small search set.

Any terrorist with half a brain is going to use euphemisms, switched words, code, etc. About all you're going to reliably turn up is a list of every school boy in America, every news agency that's ever posted a story on a bomber using fertilizer and a crackpot on a compound in Arkansas who's only a danger to himself anyway.

They don't even need to obfuscate the terms. If they are outside the States they can just plain look it up in the most overt terms possible. And also, possibly in Arabic/Urdu/Korean/AnythingButEnglish. I routinely search terms in at least two languages other than English in Google (top dog in search, I'm told...) and search quality is considerably lower, even accounting for a smaller universe.

And even if they are in the USA and searching in English, they can just do it from a Starbucks two towns away, or their public library in a large city/suburb. People that don't want to get caught usually are very good at hiding or else they do get caught.

Re:scare tactics (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354508)

Ron Paul is pretty honest. . . and there are others, usually trashed by the corporate media, but anyway:

I completely agree with you. This has gotten so far out of control. It needs to stop. This whole idea that society is safer with no freedom and an out of control corrupt government is nonsense. I don't care what excuse is made, whether real or manufactured, losing freedom is not worth whatever perceived benefit such measures could provide (Which is: None).

Not only is it a monumental waste of money in a time where we can't afford it, but it's detrimental to the integrity and social morality of society itself. More and more, this "terrorism" word is thrown around for political gain. The word itself is so loosely used these days that people in the UK are frequently called "terrorists" for taking pictures of parades. The sweeping power of anti-terrorism laws poses a far greater threat to the safety of the population than any potential attack could. They do not do anything to prevent bad guys from attacking, and serve only to destroy the incredible gift of liberty that this country was founded upon.

Simply put, there is no point in protecting the western world if there is no western world left to protect. What we lose in these endless "wars on everything" is the loss of everything that defines our culture that is worthy of praise.

Privacy, due process, accountability of even the highest offices of government, freedom of speech, freedom from official persecution, freedom of free-assembly, freedom to protect one's self, freedom of choice, freedom of mobility. Every traditionally American virtue is being stampeded upon in favor of this Orwellian nightmare state from hell. It provides no benefit, and there is no excuse great enough to justify it's existence.

Really, if you think about it, the people behind such massive abuses of American jurisprudence are the very defenition of terrorists. They are like hostage takers, that use fear mongering and doomsday scenarios to terrorize the population and elected representatives into going along with their agenda (or else). That IS terrorism, is it not?

I feel, as a law abiding American Citizen, quite a lot more terrorized by the government itself than by any brown skinned guy in a cave half a world away. That is a fact.

It's just as you said: Why not make this a place that nobody would want to attack, which would REALLY make us safer. No police state needed.

Re:scare tactics (1)

Virtual_Raider (52165) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354596)

More ridiculous terrorism scare tactics used for attention.

"If you want to search for non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer..." Let's find non-doctors charging Medicare. Corrupt cops. Meth distributors. Human traffickers. Murderers. People who built technology just to make money using other people's personal data, and try and frame it using terrorism scare tactics. Oh wait...

That is actually a pretty good suggestion, except that unless you are the press who's gonna have the resources to run stuff like this? or the interest in outing these people and the stamina to stand behind their work and resist the counterattacks? All while claiming to have a legitimate interest in snooping on vast swaths of people to find out...

Accountability is not something anybody in power seems interested in, or likely to allow random people like you and I to wield over them.

Re:scare tactics (3, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355554)

A non-tax-cheat who is also a congress member. Oh, oh, how about a politician that still has a moral compass at all? A single honest politician? Even one?

The problem with being an honest politician is most people would rather vote for a dishonest person who will do what they want than an honest person who does what they don't want. I believe this is the main formula for Bill Clinton's success, along with many other politicians.

Re:scare tactics (1)

CalcuttaWala (765227) | more than 4 years ago | (#31358906)

Well, you want to fix terrorism, then address the real reasons for hating your society; it's pretty simple, and the only thing that really works.

brother, that is easier said than done ...
what if someone hates you simply because you are are Hindu or a Sikh ? do you expect me to give up my Hindu or Sikh identity ?
what if someone hates you simply because you send your daughter to school and expect her to earn a honest living as a professional ? do you expect me keep my daughter locked up in the house ... and marry her off at puberty ?

get real brother, because the real world has people who need no real reason to hate you.

Re:scare tactics (1)

janerules (940212) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374908)

And, pedophiles...

Ummmm.... (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 4 years ago | (#31352760)

I'm not sure what the customer base is here outside of law enforcement. Google maybe, or some of the other online ad networks? Who else could possibly a) have the capability to figure out the various network connections without wiretapping, and b) be interested to know that blogger John is Facebook user Jane when John and Jane don't disclose common information?

Either they're talking trivial data mining, or they're talking spooky invasion of privacy. If it's the former, I'm not impressed. If it's the latter.... I better make sure I don't offend whoever is in power.

Re:Ummmm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31352796)

They don't need another customer base. Narus are an NSA front.

Re:Ummmm.... (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353036)

as if you need wiretapping to get all this info. Have you been paying attention lately? We gave away our right to privacy at least 5 years ago. It's gone.

Re:Ummmm.... (2, Insightful)

teh moges (875080) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353320)

You don't need to market to 'the masses' to make (substantial) money off a product. Law enforcement is a big enough market if you get good saturation and Google + other ad networks would be a massive market.

Re:Ummmm.... (3, Informative)

chill (34294) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354036)

Narus' entire customer base is pretty much government & law enforcement. Narus Insight is the toy used by the NSA to sniff Internet traffic.

Why the fuck (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31352808)

would they have access to my emails in the first place.
The captcha is dignity, which is fitting considering this world seems to have lost it's.

Re:Why the fuck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31352864)

Relax, Frank. We won't tell anyone about those Fleshlight offers you keep getting after your first purchase.

Oops.

- Narus

Re:Why the fuck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353448)

which is fitting considering this world seems to have lost it's

Lost it is what? Tell us, damn you!

Re:Why the fuck (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 4 years ago | (#31359740)

Lost it is what? Tell us, damn you!

Dignity lost, it is....

Signed,
Yoda.

Re:Why the fuck (1)

RMH101 (636144) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356122)

it's NARUS. i.e. it's Israeli tech, aimed at governments who want to do smart intercepts. They sell the equipment that the US government installs into ISPs for monitoring.

try it fags (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31352878)

eat shit, robotic villain!

Whats the point? (5, Insightful)

ickleberry (864871) | more than 4 years ago | (#31352916)

People making bombs are hardly going to talk about it on Faceshit or other worthless social sites. They are already using encryption - probably one time pads, steganography, shared secret encryption with infinite-length keys and the like and will always be able to continue doing so.

This will more likely be used to convict people for sharing mp3's, using 'stolen' wifi, people who built a small extension to their house in the middle of nowhere without straight away notifying the local government so they can pay their new and increased rates of property tax. This will be used to implement an ultra-controlled very rigidly regulated society which most people if you talk to them seem to approve of.

Man's greatest addiction is controlling other people's lives

".... should be banned because it didn't work out so well for one person"
".... should not be allowed because it affects the view from my house"
".... should be taxed to death. Put those damn rich people back where they belong."
".... is evil, could lead to any number of bigger problems and should be banned."
".... cannot be installed by anyone other than a highly trained professional because one person died trying"
".... is bad for the environment and should not be allowed."
".... should not be allowed to sit in a playground by himself because he might be a future paedophile"

We have nobody to blame but ourselves for overregulation, we desire control, order and security so much that the government is scrambling to find ways to enforce the presently unenforceable. First the church was used as an excuse for ruining people's enjoyment, now its 'de children', the environment and the notion that 'mere humans' cant handle much freedom without losing the plot

Re:Whats the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353426)

You've basically described the UK today.

It happened there first because they've got 70 million people crammed in an area less than the size of California.

Re:Whats the point? (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354830)

People making bombs are hardly going to talk about it on Faceshit or other worthless social sites. They are already using encryption - probably one time pads, steganography, shared secret encryption with infinite-length keys and the like and will always be able to continue doing so.

Real spies hate spy tech.

Simply to possess it compounds the risk of exposure.

Real spies network. There is nothing quite so anonymous and reassuring as being a face in the crowd.

 

Re:Whats the point? (1)

RMH101 (636144) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356140)

you're just arguing parameters. Say you start trawling for:
1) people who appear to be exchanging keys over email, or encrypt their traffic
2) similar IPs who make purchases or enquiries online into ordering fertiliser, or activator ingredients, or GSM SIM cards etc
3) people who are already on watch lists etc
It'll eb down to intelligence analysts to set the parameters, but this looks like a very clever and very scary tool to bring together bits of evidence that woulnd't be worth much in isolation into a profile.
People doing Bad Stuff don't have perfect security. Everyone makes slips sometime...

Re:Whats the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31357530)

People making bombs are hardly going to talk about it on Faceshit or other worthless social sites

You'd be surprised [google.es] .

"non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer" (2, Funny)

pgn674 (995941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31352994)

Hah! I get 94 results! And... the first result is Slashdot. And there are no results that don't have the word 'for' in front of 'non-farmers'...

Re:"non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer" (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#31357326)

Yeah, but because you searched for it, you now have shown an interest.

*Knock knock*

Re: Only 94? But I cheated... (1)

ibsteve2u (1184603) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376564)

I searched "non farmers novice newbie fertilizer forum -game" and got 6,590 hits on google.

Semantic web (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353048)

'It's going to go through a set of documents and automatically it's going to organize them in topics — I'm not talking about keywords as is done today, I'm talking about topics,' he said. That can't be done with today's technology, he said.

It sounds like what he's talking about is semantic parsing of data. If his system is predicated on automated semantic data parsing, that seems like a pretty big step in the project. It's a problem that CS has been working on for decades. It's not exactly a minor thing that they'll get out of the way early on.

Re:Semantic web (1)

radtea (464814) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353334)

It sounds like what he's talking about is semantic parsing of data.

And since data has no semantics, we're probably all safe, until of course the men in black come charging through the door and kill us all because we said something like, "I'm getting so pissed off at guys who hire Chinese kids to go put in game time for them and build their gold reserves. Non-farmers need to get together and see if we can't find some good old fashion organic fertilizer to throw at those bastards."

Re:Semantic web (1)

vikingpower (768921) | more than 4 years ago | (#31357730)

And since data has no semantics

Excuse me ? Only totally incoherent data has no semantics. From any set of data having a coherence greater than zero, at least part of the semantics can be deduced by internal analysis ( you do that every time when you solve a puzzle, for example )

Money for nothing and the ... (1)

giorgist (1208992) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353058)

Man what a scam. One paragraph, a cheezy search algorythm
and approach the department of defence.

Put in the title protect children from terrorists
and they wont even read past the front page.

Re:Money for nothing and the ... (1)

h3llfish (663057) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353204)

Artificial intelligence! Sounds mighty impressive. So this search algorithm can pass a Turing test, huh? What a breakthrough!

Sounds like data mining to me. The concept is not new, and the incorrect use of buzzwords is a serious red flag. Perhaps the system is indeed powerful and maybe even innovative, but AI? No. If this thing gains sentience and annihilates mankind, I will apologize to it for saying that.

Latent Semantic Indexing (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353084)

The automated categorization of text by topic is not new. Latent Semantic Indexing [wikipedia.org] has been in use for just this purpose since 1992. Perhaps Narus is taking a new approach, but the concept itself is far from the revolutionary breakthrough they would have you believe.

Re:Latent Semantic Indexing (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353488)

I don't think it's constructive to refer to people as "Latent Semantics". They might live their whole lives as Christians and suppress their natural tendencies to become Jewish.

"Easy place to hide"?? BS! (5, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353202)

In many ways, the cyber world is ideal for subversive and terrorist activities, said Antonio Nucci, chief technology officer with Narus. "For bad people, it's an easy place to hide," Nucci said. "They can get lost and very easily hide behind a massive ocean of legal digital transactions."

I would really, really like to take people who are promoting "security" and who say "the Internet is an easy place to hide", to someplace private and then continuously bitch-slap them until they admit that they are either stupid or dishonest.

If they want to investigate a place where it's "easy to hide", I suggest they try their data-mining tools on the mails, or UPS or Fed-Ex. And good f**ing luck to them.

Breathe them vapors (2, Insightful)

Datamonstar (845886) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353280)

Dude needs to learn how to use Google before he takes on a task of this magnitude. Or, more aptly, before TALKING about taking on a task of this magnitude, which is all he's doing at the moment.

Sounds like Semantic Web to me. (3, Interesting)

ShinmaWa (449201) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353310)

'If you want to search for non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer ... it's not even searchable.'

This sounds an awful lot like the semantic web [wikipedia.org] . Specifically, this sounds exactly like what WebFountain [wikipedia.org] does (and has done since 2003).

Re:Sounds like Semantic Web to me. (3, Funny)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353474)

Actually, it sounds like "fertilizer lawn OR garden -farm".

Re:Sounds like Semantic Web to me. (2, Informative)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355536)

That's not even to mention that for anyone who isn't a complete moron (I know that sounds like a flame, but really it is an accurate description of the low level of intelligence necessary to figure out the correct search query). Here it is, fertilizer bomb recipes all over the place [google.com] , along with videos of said bombs in action. It is in no way hidden, this guy is a dirty lying marketer.

Interested in Narus? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353486)

PBS' Frontline [pbs.org] released a documentary called "Spying on the Home Front" [pbs.org] all the way back on May 15th, 2007. The entire documentary is available for viewing online (I believe it's even accessible in Canada; I'm not sure about access from other countries) at that Frontline site. If you're short on time, click the "Watch the Full Program Online" link on the right-hand side of the page, and then click on Chapter 3 in the new window that appears (it's titled "The NSA's Eavesdropping at AT&T"). The whole chapter only lasts about 10 minutes, but again, if you're short on time fast-forward through the chapter to about 4:30. That's the point where Mark Klein describes when he first became aware that a Narus STA system had been installed inside a secret room at a major AT&T facility. Shortly thereafter Brian Reid elaborates on exactly what its presence meant.

Even better, at about 5:05 an interview with Steve Bannerman, VP of Narus Marketing begins, at which point he begins describing just how deeply into network traffic their hardware can probe.

And beautifully, at about 6:35, Steve Bannerman suddenly becomes aware of exactly how deep a whole he's dug for himself, and becomes visibly flustered, starts stammering, and eventually trails off with a couple of classic lines like, "as far as I know, no one's ever proved [sic] anything!"

That part's worth rewinding and replaying a few times over.

Please forgive my obvious schadenfreude, but in the face of entities like the NSA and Naurus, who together apparently have complete access to anything of mine -- and that of my friends, and my family -- that travels over the Internet, schadenfreude is all I've got left.

Anyone got any mod points? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31353710)

Mod parent up insightful. Or funny. Or scary ... as apparently even Narus itself will describe some of its own capabilities that way.

Re:Interested in Narus? (1)

ekimminau (775300) | more than 4 years ago | (#31437152)

I knew about this interview but never knew it was made available online. Thanks for the link and the details of where to look. Bannerman talks about only part of the capabilities of a product that has progressed to much more powerful hardware on much faster CPU with much more RAm and MUCH faster storage. Real time data analysis at theoretical full pipe bandwidth with multiple data source aggregation is that much easier. The larger your data sources, the greater the probability of cross identification in the shorter amount of time. Anyone know the maximum number of nodes supported by Oracle 11G RAC (the backend DB for narus devices)?

Personally, I think (4, Funny)

ameline (771895) | more than 4 years ago | (#31353842)

Personally I think this guy and his company can be compared (unfavorably most likely) to a steaming pile of hot, fresh organic fertilizer.

P.S. I'm not a farmer.

Re:Personally, I think (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31355174)

Personally I think this guy and his company can be compared (unfavorably most likely) to a steaming pile of hot, fresh organic fertilizer.

P.S. I'm not a farmer.

stone crusher [crushersmill.com]

Topics are cute but (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354120)

They know your looking at IM, forums, google ect. http://wikileaks.org/ [wikileaks.org] google cache has a link to
http://indect-project.eu/files/deliverables/public/INDECT_Deliverable_4.1_v20090630a.pdf/at_download/file [indect-project.eu]
Anybody of interest knows to keep a very low profile.
Never buy too much of anything thats a direct step to a listed watched chemical.
Never talk to strangers online about political ideas.
Stay out of web 2.0. If mainstream US cable news and the US mil is talking up twitter, never use twitter.
Learn how to protest, learn how 1 person can change the system and then just melt back to be replaced by another random stranger.
If 10 or 100 or 10000 random strangers turn up the US mil is going to have a really bad day.
Do they allow a protest to grow, beat it down or try to re shape it.
They seem to be hoping Narus will allow them to pick out leaders and arrest/smear/turn them.
Someone needs to tell the US gov, the world has moved beyond leaders and cointelpro has been reverse engineered - people expect and enjoy infiltration, film it and lol at it.
The US is on the edge of 1980's Europe. They think the tech will save them.
Millions of online searches, chat and ip's will allow them to filter out the bright connected ones and somehow stop unrest.
The only winners are the people selling the Narus like tech and the people who know to never surface.

Re:Topics are cute but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354452)

The free market idea that the best determiner of value is sales often excuses the most harmful human motivations. So don't sell - give it away, like open source. Write software that makes Narus unnecessary!

Re:Topics are cute but (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354678)

http://mrl.nyu.edu/~dhowe/trackmenot/ [nyu.edu] is a nice start for firefox to pump out random digital chaff when your online.

Do terrotists tell the truth? (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354148)

He wants to compare similar data from social networks to identify people. So, a person who has something to hide is going to give his real birthday on all sites he uses to hide on? Why?

It would be like me creating a false passport, with my real data. How about getting a fake id, with your real age to get into bars?

How about a fake University diploma, that shows you failed... A fake doctors license, that has 'revoked' stamped on it? How about stealing the bank details, from a homeless person.

Re:Do terrotists tell the truth? (1)

ekimminau (775300) | more than 4 years ago | (#31437226)

You are missing the level of complexity of Narus STA when deployed at all of the major ingress and egress points of the largest back bone providers. Search for all occurances of Source IP Match All source MAC Query all destination Query & Store all transferred by file type: JPG, BMP, MOV, MP3 Query and store all (VOIP, SIP) streams data (source (IP,MAC), destination (IP, MAC), start time, end time, QOS, bandwidth, bytes inbound, bytes outbound (set tag, capture all futures streams) Search for MATCH of destination MAC Query and store all IP streams, (set tag, capture all future streams) While this is not exact syntax, this is the level of capability of the NARUS product 8 years ago. On a match based on english driven filter rules, the product could tag, index, analyse and store all sessions to/from any source/destination identified by hostname, IP address or MAC. Whatever encryption you have on the stream doesn't matter if the entire stream (including encyption handshake) is captured, stored in an indexed oracle database and an Analyst is immediately notified that they need to start examining the stream(s).

Fertilizer And Farmers (1)

nick_davison (217681) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354222)

'If you search for fertilizers on Google ... it's going to come back with 6.5 million pages. Enjoy,' he said. 'If you want to search for non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer ... it's not even searchable.'

Sure it is. 6,499,996 of those 6.5m are non farmers discussing fertilizer. With mega farms taking over farming, there are only, what, four actual farmers in America. </joke>

Even if we assume there are huge numbers of farmers on the internets, discussing fertilizer all day... He's implying 6.5m is too large a set to go through but the non farmer set is small enough to manually browse through. Really? So there aren't millions of home owners with gardens in America? There aren't tens of thousands of HOAs handling their own landscaping? There aren't armies of landscapers? And that's before you get in to the 106,000 results Google gives you for "fertilizer + bomb". Even if you weed out every last farmer, every landscaper, every HOA, every home owner... you still have over 100,000 entries to go through of people simply discussing fertilizer and bombs. To turn his own words back on him, "Enjoy."

Be afraid... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354320)

Anyone who's used Narus equipment (I'm willing to bet that the numbers are very small, even here on /.) can attest to the fact that its implementation is rarely done for the purposes of securing a network. Rather, in every case I've seen, it's done in the name of securing a society. The technology that Narus has (and has had for some time) is incredible. I have seen it implemented in some of the most despot countries in the world for the sole purpose of catching 'evildoers' (you know, folks who dare speak out against the regime). Thank goodness Narus has come up with a reliable way to catch those pesky anonymous ones.

Phil Marlowe, Social Media Sleuth (1)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354368)

Apologies, I'm reposting this from a few months ago, but I thought it was appropriate:

The faded gold lettering on the door says "Philip Marlowe." My digs aren't in the greatest part of town, but that suits me just fine. I'm a blogger-one of the few honest ones out there. Work was a little slow-I was spending some time on important research-reading Slashdot. I was just about to hit the submit button on a post entitled "Frosty Piss!" when the dame shrugged her way through my door. If I'd have known what was going to happen next, I would have stuck to trolling.

She was tall for an Oriental, but not unappealing. She wore a black silk dress cut in traditional Chinese manner, studded with soft pink roses. Her eyes were black and silky as the dress. They didn't stay still. "Are you Marlowe?" she asked, scanning the room.

"Sure," I replied diffidently.

"Your blogging reputation proceeds you. The Chinese government has a job for you."

"Nuts to that. I don't work for commies."

"I could make it worth your while, Mr. Marlowe."

"If I sold out to every fancy-pants who walked through that door, would I be working in this place?"

"I understand your position, Marlowe, but listen. There's a 24-year-old kid who got beaten to death while in police custody. The police say it was from playing hide-and-seek. We need an official investigation, and you're the best investigational blogger we know."

"Sure it wasn't from 'ring around the rosie'?" I smirked nastily. She took a sharp breath.

"Listen, Marlowe, don't you want to help improve the situation? I know you've had certain...shall we say...run-ins with hyperactive authority figures in the past. Surely this could help your reputation."

"MY reputation?" I practically yelled. "Lady, I've been called a troll, a spammer, and an astroturfer more times than you can count on your abacus. I've been modded down, banned, accused of violating TOSs, but I'm still here. So don't think you can tell me about my reputation. I'll do it for $100/day plus expenses."

"Very good, Mr. Marlowe," she purred.

"Oh, and one more thing," I stood up and got my hat. "I'd better be on the official Chinese government blogroll by sundown, or you're gonna have to find yourself a new patsy."

On the internet? (2, Insightful)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354610)

> non-farmers who are discussing fertilizer

That's pretty much the whole internet; a lot of non-farmers talking a bunch of shit.

Those paranoid bastards... (1)

KillerLoop (202131) | more than 4 years ago | (#31357334)

... are going to ruin us all!

Narus continues to build "Big Brother" (1)

ekimminau (775300) | more than 4 years ago | (#31357476)

Narus products have always been about telling you who is doing what with you, when and for how long on your network. http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/05/70914 [wired.com] http://www.scribd.com/doc/27629223/All-About-NSA-s-and-AT-amp-T-s-Big-Brother-Machine-The-Narus [scribd.com] http://www.xchangemag.com/articles/631feature06.html [xchangemag.com] http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/8/14724/28476 [dailykos.com] There has even been speculation that their products are at the core of "Carnivore" and/or "ESCHELON" http://www.texaskaos.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2496 [texaskaos.com] Their primary customers are three letter agencies and the biggest of the big IP backbone providers. If you put devices capable of tracking every IP stream, encrypted or not, with source, destination, duration, size and QOS and you can start associating every stream with an identifiable person, adding to that the ability to extrapolate based upon types of user communities, net anonymity will certainly becaome lless possible. Now the question is, who watches the watchmen?

Re:Narus continues to build "Big Brother" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31357896)

Now the question is, who watches the watchmen?

we do...

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?