×

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!

US Wants Upper Hand In Battling High-Tech Bad Guys

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the new-bag-of-tricks dept.

Crime 81

coondoggie writes "The US Department of Justice this week said it was looking to boost the research and development of technology that could significantly bolster new forensic tools for digital evidence gathering. The DoJ's research and development arm, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) said it was particularly interested in tools targeting forensics for mobile cellular devices; cloud computing environments; VoIP communication and vehicle computer systems."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

81 comments

Yeah, well... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34160500)

I want a pony.

Re:Yeah, well... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34160640)

there's an app for that

Re:Yeah, well... (1, Funny)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160780)

Yeah, well, if you were a government, you could afford a pony. Maybe even quite a few destriers.

Re:Yeah, well... (0, Offtopic)

Faatal (1907534) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161032)

You receive item: [Pony]

Re:Yeah, well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34163748)

nuts to ponies, I want a unicorn !
A well hung unicorn...

Re:Yeah, well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34295300)

Just ask a lesbian to borrow her strapon. Secure it to the pony's forehead.

Viola. A Unicorn.

Plus you now have everything needed to keep 4 people occupied.

Re:Yeah, well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34168018)

I like turtles!

Translation. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34160510)

Translation. The government wants to invade the privacy of every man, woman, and child. Gotta get those terrorists.

Re:Translation. (1, Insightful)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160630)

Yes, it is good to live in a completely reversible world.
Terrorist = Person <=> Person = Terrorist.

Re:Translation. (2, Interesting)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160942)

Not all people are terrorists, but all terrorists are people.

Tautology is.

Re:Translation. (1)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160998)

Not all people are terrorists, but all terrorists are people.

Just wait for robots with strong AI, or some mad geneticist to uplift animals.

But then, cats prove that you don't need sentience for terrorism. A naughty dog gets its bed peed upon -- this does require abstract thinking, and, while far lesser in scale than WTC, follows the same logic.

Re:Translation. (1)

slick7 (1703596) | more than 3 years ago | (#34165128)

Not all people are terrorists, but all terrorists are people..

Except when sanctioned by/for the government.

Re:Translation. (3, Informative)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161474)

After Ruby Ridge, Waco, and having a sitting president order the execution of an American citizen without even a trial? Your layout is pretty accurate looking to me. Being labeled a terrorist: it's not just for brown people anymore!

As for TFA? They can get ALL they want, they've already lost, as the encryption cat is out of the bag. I have a friend that works at the state crime lab in charge of catching kiddie pron. He keeps trying to recruit me but....eeeew! Not enough brain bleach in the world for THAT job! Anyway he says that other than the social retards on Limewire or some other P2P trading the same crap that has been floating around since the 80s it is damned near impossible to catch them strictly by digital files anymore. Why? Because the bad guys have all discovered 2048 bit crypto, that's why.

So I'd say with mobile devices getting more powerful every day it isn't "the bad guys" that have to worry about this, it is the average Joe. They are the ones that'll be running around with unlocked devices or still using the default password, whereas the bad guys will have everything locked up. Of course that brings me to my second worry, that the US Gov (or the Chinese, can't leave them out either) will simply have back doors installed in the chips. Then you think you are actually securing your data but in actuality they could input one master password and voila! all your security belong to us.

Hell this discussion is probably moot anyway, as working with average folks all day I can say you want to know everything about them just ask FaceBook. Not only is everyone gladly spewing every detail of their lives to them, but using NoScript I've noticed lately FB is hooking into more and more and MORE sites, at a rate that makes Google look like a Mickey Mouse operation. Want to know everything about somebody? Just ask FB.

Re:Translation. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34161568)

You might like T-mobile's G2 -- now with a shiny new hardware kill switch.

Re:Translation. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34162344)

There's more forensic data to be had than what the user went out of his way to encrypt. If you bothered with the article and summary, you'd see that they're looking for tools for extracting information from a variety of devices. Some devices just aren't going to be used to store a user's privately encrypted data. I doubt you'll find many pedo's storing their encrypted kiddy in their van's OnStar system. However, there may be other useful information of forensic value.

Re:Translation. (2, Insightful)

The Wild Norseman (1404891) | more than 3 years ago | (#34163402)

Because the bad guys have all discovered 2048 bit crypto, that's why.

So I'd say with mobile devices getting more powerful every day it isn't "the bad guys" that have to worry about this, it is the average Joe. They are the ones that'll be running around with unlocked devices or still using the default password, whereas the bad guys will have everything locked up.

Yes, that's exactly the problem. Only the bad guys will be savvy enough to actually lock down their shit so it becomes easy to spot the bad guys and the few not-bad guys who also happen to encrypt their shit get unfairly targeted.

There's no default of encryption or privacy anymore. Countless times around the country do innocent people give up their rights when dealing with the cops and government just because it's a) easier or b) they've "got nothing to hide" and frankly, that scares me the most.

Re:Translation. (1)

Fnord666 (889225) | more than 3 years ago | (#34169634)

at a rate that makes Google look like a Mickey Mouse operation.

I thought that was Disney(tm).

Isn't this democracy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34161264)

Aren't we told again and again that our republic is a democratic one? So how is it that we all understand that "the government" is some big brother like entity which imposes on us freely to support its own devious goals? Where is the democracy in there? Anywhere?

Or does everyone now agree that the slippery slope to totalitarianism is now tilted pretty darn high?

Well, the one escape course from impending totalitarianism is to simply start over with Matagovernment. [metagovernment.org]

Re:Isn't this democracy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34161656)

Well, the one escape course from impending totalitarianism is to simply start over with Matagovernment.

Except I think it is spelled "Metagovernment."

Re:Isn't this democracy? (1)

Lanteran (1883836) | more than 3 years ago | (#34166990)

Just something I've always thought about the failings in several traditional forms of governments:
  • Republics (representative democracies)- Work great in the beginning but degenerate into oligarchy. This is fairly close to inevitable.
  • Absolute Democracies- Work well in the beginning, degenerate into mob rule like in ancient Greece. Can be lessened with good education systems.
  • Benevolent dictatorships- Obviously degenerate into malevolent dictatorships. Inevitable.
  • Anarcy- works great for about 5 minutes then you get conquered by a warlord. Solvable if everyone sticks to their guns, but that presents a whole new set of problems

Meta government looks interesting, and I'm not sure how well it would work, but I'm keeping an eye on it from now on.

Re:Translation. (1)

slick7 (1703596) | more than 3 years ago | (#34165100)

Translation. The government wants to invade the privacy of every man, woman, and child. Gotta get those terrorists.

For the patriotic sake of the children whales.

Re:Translation. (1)

Anachragnome (1008495) | more than 3 years ago | (#34166432)

"The government wants to invade the privacy of every man, woman, and child."

The good news is that they haven't a fucking clue as how do so, thus the article.

To be honest, I already thought they HAD these capabilities. There is also the real possibility this is all a ploy to get us to THINK they don't know how (see sig).

Oh, no, they won't misuse this (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34160538)

Yeah, let's just keep giving the government more and more power.

There's a fundamental reason why tax cuts are good: starve the beast.

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (3, Insightful)

migla (1099771) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160638)

>There's a fundamental reason why tax cuts are good: starve the beast.

It would be likely, that starving the beast would first shed such excess fat as health care and social security and other things that would benefit the poor.

This would lead to an even wider gap, which would lead to more crime, which in turn would justify an even stronger police state.

So, even if one would agree with your anti-statism, tax cuts are not necessarily pragmatic.

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (2, Funny)

Anon-Admin (443764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160732)

Then why dont we outsource the National Institute of Justice to India. They have the people and technology to develop the software needed for much less than it would cost to do it here in the US. Saves Taxpayers money. :P

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (1)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160846)

have you forgotten about WIndows Millennium and Vista? This is the limit of India's "abilities".

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34161138)

I'm confused. A really bad OS followed by a really good one. India is wild.

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (3, Insightful)

kenh (9056) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160976)

You can't "starve the beast" if the beast can simply print more money (thus making your money worth less, in effect starving YOU)...

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161234)

restated, we are on a course of instability and divergence, not convergence.

engineers can see that.

politicians, too; they just are sociopaths and don't CARE beyond their own local power circle.

making the powerful even more powerful is NOT going to help us all. sadly, the ones in control won't change and the ones below refuse to rise up.

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (2, Interesting)

dpilot (134227) | more than 3 years ago | (#34162206)

Since there's an island of relative sanity here, here I'll respond. As you have implied and others have stated, the surveillance would be kept funded in preference to many other things we may consider more valuable. But there's another thing...

Imagine the aftermath of the next successful terrorist event. The first question to be asked will be, "Why didn't the government stop this?" The answer will carry the next question (demand), "Because we didn't have enough law enforcement capabilities, give us more!" What's missing is reason. I can grant that some level of surveillance, wiretaps, etc is necessary in order to mitigate security threats, but I believe that wholesale surveillance is ineffective in addition to being just plain wrong. Unfortunately we only appear to hear from 2 camps, the Omnipresent Camp (see and hear everything) and the No Surveillance Camp. No (audible) public voices are trying to chart the course to find effective security, acceptable risk, and preserving our privacy and freedom. It's a really delicate balancing act, but in the public forum I don't even think we're trying to find a sweet spot.

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34164648)

Defining "acceptable risk" is very unpopular.

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (1)

RedHat Rocky (94208) | more than 3 years ago | (#34172570)

The real question no one asks:

What did we do to piss these people off so much that they did this horrible thing in the first place?

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (1)

dpilot (134227) | more than 3 years ago | (#34174696)

You have to step really far outside of our normal culture to even start to understand this. There was a recent move, "Why We Fight", not the WWII one, that starts to jog an explanation.

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (2, Insightful)

dcollins (135727) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160788)

"There's a fundamental reason why tax cuts are good: starve the beast."

Idiot. Budget cuts might possibly starve the beast. Or even a balanced budget amendment. Tax cuts alone just mean charging current expenses to a high-rate credit card. That you & I are on the hook for. This is exactly the same kind of reasoning that has personal debt in the USA at obscene levels. Buy now & pay later, yeah, right.

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (2, Insightful)

Gerzel (240421) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160874)

Starving the beast is the line used once tax cuts fail to produce improved economic growth and the line used when people don't take any responsibility for being part of the government(aka the beast). It is easier to simply remove funding than to trouble oneself to argue and work for constructive change.

What isn't said is that given the concentration of wealth in the United States it is starving one beast to feed another. The beast of democratic bureaucracy would make a fine meal for the beast of capitalist oligarchy.

Re:Oh, no, they won't misuse this (2, Insightful)

TarPitt (217247) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161672)

Starving public universities and transportation will turn the US into a 3rd world country. We've been seeing this for the last 30 years of relative economic decline, export of skilled jobs and declining public health statistics (compared to all other industrialized countries).

The elites will always find the money to finance surveillance systems - it helps protect them against the mobs. They may privatize portions of the surveillance state to avoid accountability, but you better believe it will be the last thing to go.

In Soviet Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34163224)

the beast starves you!

Oh... wait...

Keep illegal stuff off the grid. (5, Interesting)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160568)

As more and more surveillence becomes adapted online less and less recources are put IRL. The smart criminals can even use this survaillence to their advantage. Some stuff you can do:

Let a friend take your phone somewhere while you bust in or do some other crime.
Plaster all kinds of activities on social sites that would make it impossible to do something illegal, while you are doing those crimes.
Send messages where you arrange a fake meeting.

Most important of all, never mention anything illegal while online, ever, anywhere. No matter what encryption you have its more or less useless if someone has access to your cell/comp/accounts. The sad in all this is that its crappy criminals that gets busted while the smart ones have the time of their life. Im also worried about it being misused for personal gain. If history is anything to go by, countless of innocent lives have already been ruined because someone with access to these informations used them for personal gain.

Re:Keep illegal stuff off the grid. (4, Insightful)

AlecC (512609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160746)

You say that it is the "crappy criminals" that get busted. The vast majority of criminals (not terrorists) are stupid. The clever ones have worked out that crime doesn't pay. If you are clever enough to do all the things you say, which avoid you getting caught, you are also clever enough to make as much money legally as you would illegally, and you don't have the risk of prison. I am sure a lot of big business leaders would make great criminals. But why bother. Some criminals of course do succeed in avoiding the law for a long time - every bell curve has its tails. But overwhelmingly, criminals get caught because they are not clever enough.

And this is not coincidental. We buy enough law enforcement to make it not worth while clever people being criminals, while accepting that the stupid will be with us always.

Re:Keep illegal stuff off the grid. (3, Insightful)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161068)

Crime does pay, handsomely. Both white collar crimes and your normal kinds like theft etc. To just brush the enormous amounts of people doing crimes off as idiots is to vastly oversimplify for oneself and shift the blame away from society.

One of the times crimes pays best is when you dont have anything to lose and not any viable options to get something you even can lose. Those are the people who mostly get cought. For many of them a life in prison isnt much worse than life on the streets.

Educated and smart criminals can go on for many years without even getting near a police. They have something to lose and are not very interested in getting in jail. Those people wont brag about their crimes on the phone or plan something on facebook.

Re:Keep illegal stuff off the grid. (4, Interesting)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161270)

The vast majority of criminals (not terrorists) are stupid. The clever ones have worked out that crime doesn't pay. If you are clever enough to do all the things you say, which avoid you getting caught, you are also clever enough to make as much money legally as you would illegally, and you don't have the risk of prison

two kinds of sociopaths: those the end up on one side of law enforcement and those that end up on the other.

at times, it even may be hard to tell them apart, as their personalities and what makes them 'tick' are very similar, if not exactly the same.

we somehow accept this personality type as a leadership type and we ELECT them to office, too.

when was the last time a smart brainy nerdy guy was elected to a high ranking public office? we don't elect thinkers or builders. we elect NUTJOBS, primarily.

crime does pay. the code of justice is a maze and those who can navigate it well make out well. that's on BOTH sides, law enforcement and criminal. prison system continues to drain our otherwise useful funds (very profitable to lock people up in the US) and smart criminals avoid it all and find the loopholes that don't require 'murdering people' and such. they are still horribly evil people, but they know how to survive.

so again, crime does pay. need more proof? spend time with wallstreet guys and tell me otherwise.

Re:Keep illegal stuff off the grid. (1)

AlecC (512609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161460)

But the Wall Street guys manage (usually) to keep out of crime. They are immoral, not illegal. That is exactly my point: they have worked out how to become rich without breaking the letter of the law. Wherever we set the boundaries of the law, clever people will dance about just on the dry side, while the stupid will be washed away.

Re:Keep illegal stuff off the grid. (1)

Sean (422) | more than 3 years ago | (#34166892)

Many big business and government leaders are criminals.

Cool (1)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160582)

And I want a tropical island, that i can retire to when I am older. Wishing something doesn't not materializes it. And in this specific field, they can only wish for it. There is always some genius (someone with a lot of time) to wreak havoc on whatever they have up their sleeves.

So does this mean (3, Funny)

Mattskimo (1452429) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160586)

That my 35 pass Gutmann wipe I perform every month is now justified? I'm paranoid *and* they are after me?

Re:So does this mean (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34160628)

>35 pass Gutmann

If you're still relying on 35 pass Gutmann you're vulnerable anyway. Might as well print your data out and paper your walls with it.

YOU can't always get what you want (0, Flamebait)

chronoss2010 (1825454) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160588)

lol but if you try sometimes.....ya get what ya need.... and that isn't what they want. and what is illegal stuff off the grid WHOM determines that -Chronoss united hackers association

More transparency is good (2, Interesting)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160710)

It depends on who has control over access to the devices / clouds. Just make sure the evidence can only be collected with a subpoena related to a criminal investigation. No crime, no access.

For me, it'd be great if my device logs were admissible as evidence supporting my innocence. But in politics and law, it seems to depend more on the lawyer's ability to cast doubt on data and bring it down to who can make the more effective delivery of "truthiness". Which is why I avoid both of those fields like the plague.

crims (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34160742)

I have a list of the latest criminal scams and fraudsters delivered to my inbox daily, if i contact any of them many would be more than happy to meet me or facilitate evidence on their own and iam not even a law enforcement person,
so what evidence does the goverment need exactly ?

perhaps the authorities want to read their own frickin Spam folders once in a while, there is more than enough evidence to choose from, if evidence is hard to find they 'aint looking at all

Re:crims (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161158)

The spam mostly originates from Elbonia. Hard to prosecute anything across national borders unless it's *really* serious, and can be tricky even then.

Domestic Spying (5, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160794)

If the "Justice" departments really wanted to battle "bad guys" in high tech crime, they would be targeting the highest crime rate domains with the biggest losses already. That is phishing and spam/virus networks that already take over $BILLIONS in IT personal property, using it to rob its owners and amass it into bot networks to attack others. Those crimes are committed largely by a relatively small group of crime gangs, largely concentrated in Asia (including Russia) which are also connected to large non-virtual crime in smuggling dangerous drugs, stealing property, counterfeiting brands, slavery, weapons trading (including WMD components), kidnapping, blackmail. The phishing/spam/botnet networks are probably the least bad of their crimes, and the greatest exposure to the public where they could be caught, with most of their traffic passing through the US even if the endpoints are all foreign. They're the obvious place for US law enforcement. Existing law allows US law enforcement to spy on them and catch them, while only small technology innovations might be necessary to do so - even without the PATRIOT Acts and other violations of the US Constitution.

What is required is that US law enforcement actually want to catch "bad guys". Then they'd have the means and opportunity to do everything they say they want.

But evidently they lack the motive. Their motive is to gain ever more power to spy on everyone, regardless of evidence or crimes. They've already been spying on telephone and email comms of every American they can fit on a hard drive, for years. What they want now is just bigger budgets for hard drives, for more secret police, and more laws that violate the Constitution and our rights so they can do so with impunity.

These secret police are the "bad guys".

Re:Domestic Spying (1)

omnibit (1737004) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161100)

The spam kings (and queens) that you mention are largely in countries that do not want to cooperate with U.S. authorities and their hunt to prosecute foreign nationals.

So spying is about all they have.

Re:Domestic Spying (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161164)

US authorities have all the technology, laws and budgets they need to "spy" on foreign spammers. All it takes to start spying is an email address, especially if it's published in a web page. US authorities also have lots of leverage in prosecuting foreign nationals, including crime treaties, international law, and the usual diplomatic carrots and sticks.

But the authorities don't use them. Instead they want more. It's obvious that they want more power to spy on people in the US, not really foreign criminals.

Re:Domestic Spying (2, Informative)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161328)

These secret police are the "bad guys".

this is not a new idea but its an interesting one. who do you have more to fear from: the government who can ruin your life or 'organized crime' who might ruin your 'day' but then leave you alone (and certainly not keep records on you) ?

I don't worry about regular criminals. I do worry more about the criminal (and secret) behavior of my own government. THEY come back to fark with you again and again if they so please. their power is totally unchecked.

americans should NOT live in fear for their own government, yet that's exactly the feeling that is coming over america as of late. very sad that we didn't see this coming (or didn't do anything to stop this wave).

terrorists are not in my life; but the government is. terrorists don't affect me (I don't buy that myth) but the government policies surely affect us all.

we know who the real terrorists are. we just are now AFRAID to call it as we see it. yes, the terrorists have won, but its not the ones you were thinking of.

Re:Domestic Spying (2, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161716)

You have presented a false dilemma. The reason you don't worry about regular criminals is because the government protects you from them enough that you don't have to worry. That doesn't mean you don't have to worry about the government committing crimes. These are not exclusive categories in some Sim City world. They are descriptions of groups of people and their behavior, which has substantial overlap and fuzzy boundaries.

Terrorists do affect Americans, including people not in their direct line of fire. The World Trade Center in NYC really was destroyed in 2001, as was the Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995 along with several other targets in the US - not to mention many more foreign targets of US assets and foreign assets. The actual terrorism is the political use of those attacks as credible threats. So while the US government has practiced more terrorism on Americans using the credible threat presented by bombings, that doesn't mean non-government terrorists don't exist.

Americans did do "something" to see this coming and to stop it. The entire government system is based on distrust of government, limiting its powers. Americans spend lots of time and effort interfering with government's power and activity in political use of fear to control us. What Americans have failed to do is to stop electing people who cooperate in betraying the people, rather than oppose each other with power to catch each other betraying the people. Americans have taken the bribes of unsustainable credit and unlimited entertainment instead of protecting ourselves from government corruption. Failing to impeach Nixon for Watergate (and more) or Reagan/Bush for Iran/Contra (and more), allowing the House to impeach Clinton for practically nothing without replacing those House and Senate representatives who voted to remove him, reelecting Bush/Cheney and their congressmembers who voted to start and continue the Iraq War (and more)... that is where Americans have failed.

And meanwhile actual terrorists, both foreign and domestic, continue to create and use credible threats of violence to produce political action to their benefit that all damages the American people. Just because the government practices its own terrorism on us doesn't mean it's got the monopoly.

Bad Guys (1)

wrook (134116) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160824)

Is it just me or is anyone else disturbed by this trend to call people "bad guys". It kind of implies that there is no reason to try to understand their motives or what they are trying to accomplish. They are simply "bad" and must be thwarted. Clearly on the other side are the "good guys". These are defined to be the people attempting to thwart the "bad guys" and nothing more. Obviously the opposite of "bad" is "good" and if they are good, we need to question their motives even less. Heck, they're the "good guys" after all.

Deeply scary in my book.

Re:Bad Guys (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34161130)

Absolutely disturbing, and the habit seems most prevalent in law enforcement communities. I guess it makes the job easier to stomach.

Re:Bad Guys (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34161252)

"The ideal set up by the Party was something huge, terrible, and glittering—a world of steel and concrete, of monstrous machines and terrifying weapons—a nation of warriors and fanatics, marching forward in perfect unity, all thinking the same thoughts and shouting the same slogans, perpetually working, fighting, triumphing, persecuting—three hundred million people all with the same face."

simpler & cheaper way (1)

Max_W (812974) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160894)

Teach cops what an IP address is and some foreign languages at police academies.

Useless without effective criminal code (2, Insightful)

GaryOlson (737642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160934)

"White collar" criminals steal peoples' entire life savings; but don't get life in prison; and those eventually convicted usually don't live a life of destitution afterward. Until such time as the prosecution, conviction, and restitution phases for large scale white collar crime is equal to the crime, extra tools are pointless.The new tools may prove beyond a doubt the essentials of the crime. But these research requests should also include legislation which includes suitable punishment.

White collar crime is too difficult to detect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34161660)

Take for example George W. Bush's recent confession that he authorized torture in his "Decision Points" book. There is no doubt that torture is a violation of US law, US treaties and international law . . . and yet the Justice Department can't seem to get all of these facts together for some reason. It's just too difficult, I suppose.

Wow! (2, Insightful)

kenh (9056) | more than 3 years ago | (#34160964)

The DoJ wants better evidence-gathering tools?! THEY MUST BE STOPPED!

Seriously, why must every attempt to increase security be viewed as the the end of all democracy & privacy?

I'm not advocating for complaceny, but not every proposal is evil...

Re:Wow! (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161350)

I'm not advocating for complaceny, but not every proposal is evil...

given the MO of how things are these days, I'd have to take the position of assume its bad unless proven otherwise. defend each new increase in powers *vigorously* or you don't get new powers.

we give them away too often and easily. we should assume they are all bad unless proven useful. think about it.

Re:Wow! (4, Insightful)

maztuhblastah (745586) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161542)

Seriously, why must every attempt to increase security be viewed as the the end of all democracy & privacy?

Because, at least in the model of how the US is supposed to work, the response to a government calling for more power should not be "why not?" but rather "why?"

In this case, that's a very good question to ask. See they [the various three-letter organizations] already have vast powers of surveillance. They have all sorts of legal privileges allowing them to intercept foreign and criminal communications with ease, all contingent on the provision of a warrant (and thus probable cause). Hell, thanks to the last regime, they don't even need that much of the time, especially not to spy on a common citizen like you or I.

So in light of that, the response to a call for even better tools and even more leeway to spy on US citizens should be "Why?" Why do we need these tools? Why are the existing ones inadequate? Can you demonstrate that? What crimes do propose new tools will help you solve -- cite specific examples please, not just "it may us catch some bad guys".

And if the government can't come up with a damn good answer to "Why?", then our answer should be "No."

You want the upper hand, America? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34161242)

Maybe you can start by not glamorizing idiocracy and stop giving attention to those that do.

If the USA Wants an upper hand..... (3, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#34161294)

Then it needs to stop treating IT, CompSci, and It security like the plumber and building manager and PAY FOR IT.

Sorry but it's fact. You want to have a crack IT team that keeps all the bad guys out and the company's data secure? Then you have to pay 6 figures each for Highly skilled and experienced IT staff instead of low 5 figures for the Freshly tested MCSE churnouts from University OF Pheonix. You have to have IT managers that have at LEAST 10 years experience in the IT field and IT security field, not some moron with a BSA degree that knows the CEO's daughter.

The US will forever lag behind the world in IT and IT security if you don't start paying for highly skilled and experienced professionals, and TREAT THEM AS SUCH!

Re:If the USA Wants an upper hand..... (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#34165558)

But, but, Joe Uberhacker has no degree, no MCXX and no CISSP! All he's done is bum around these open source projects like a dirty hippie! Sure he's got job experience, but we need someone young and hungry, who also has this experience somehow! All these industry awards and recommendations are just silly trinkets from geek conventions! We'll keep him as an option but let's not decide too hastily.

Now, John Paperskills, he's a real winner. Degree from UoP, an MCSE and a CEH, and an internship at IBM! I-B-fuckin'-M! And did you see his sharp suit and shiny teeth!? We can't go wrong with him!

Hi Tech Tools (1)

dontgetshocked (1073678) | more than 3 years ago | (#34162124)

The problem with this is that now they can quite easily snoop into even more of peoples business.I am all for watching out for the bad guys but not at the expense and loss of privacy of the good guys.

Department of "JUST US" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34163450)

They want to **** with every little piddly thing on citizens, but when it comes to banks, monetary system, or the oath they ignore it.
Why the **** are We scared of our own government?

Insider's Opinion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34163682)

mobile cellular devices; cloud computing environments; VoIP communication and vehicle computer systems.

I do Digital Forensics. Fact is, decent tools are hard to come by and the judiciaries around the world aren't keen on letting you make your own, they want standardised methodologies and tools. FOSS ones aren't usually that suitable for real investigations and the commercial solutions are expensive and often inflexible. Biggest problem for mobiles/cellphones and vehicle computer systems is that they are locked down and proprietary, we can't create decent tools for these platforms if they are locked down. Hopefully anything they do make will actually stand up in court and meet minimum standards and hopefully with be open source, but I don't see that happened in the context of these locked down platforms because these same tools could (would) also be used for reverse engineering them.

Good for Them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34163734)

What we need is a backdoor in to everything. Mafia revenues are down even as the top 0.5% of American's saw their income sharply rise during the recession. They will not be left behind.

Within 6 months of their putting a backdoor into SSL, legitimate businessman surveillance 'T's will comprise 9% of all traffic on the Internet owing to the booming business of stealing personal information without phishing.

But we'll all be that much safer from ourselves. Thanks DOJ Mom!

mod 30wn (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34164044)

from the FreeBSD exactly what you've these rules will users. Surprise and shower. For don't be afraid website. Mr. de backwards. To the THIS POST UP. to make sure the I burnt out. I backwards. To the but now they're a GAY NIGGER rsignificantly Common knowledge about who can rant faster than this ofone single puny 4, which by all benefits of being alike to reap fly...don't fear To have regular Will not work. And play area Try not feel an obligation Perform keeping Raymond in his the latest Netcraft real problems Fear the reaper how it was supposed Working on various are attending a become an unwanted don't want to feel to fight what has declined in market the political mess may also want lesson and work that you cycle; take a the project of HIV and other are about 7000/5 ASSOCIATION OF it a break, if

Nature of the beast (1)

Anarchitektur (1089141) | more than 3 years ago | (#34165860)

To state the obvious, the US wants the upper hand in everything. That's the nature of power... doubly so for a world "super power." When you're king of the hill, you perceive everyone as a threat to your supremacy. As such, you want a defense to anything the "enemy" can throw at you. You want to always be 15 steps ahead. The government bureaucracy has always been slow on the uptake when it comes to technology. In years past when the Internet was mostly the domain of nerds and researchers, there wasn't a whole lot to perceive as a threat. Now, everyone and their mother is using email, facebook, etc. That's a lot of information that is largely bypassing the scrutiny of the powers-that-be, and now with the trend of everything being online, they are feeling the fear that the knowledge of insecurity brings.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...