×

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!

New Bill Would Require US ISPs To Retain User Info

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the thanks-rep-smith-thanks-a-lot dept.

Government 132

Wesociety writes "The House Judiciary Committee, lead by Rep. Lamar Smith, is preparing a bill which would require internet service providers to retain information about their users to aid in criminal investigations. This particular bill would be a smaller part of a large measure to strengthen sanctions against acts such as child pornography. The most interesting part of this bill however is not who it targets but rather who it does not. The bill would make wireless companies exempt from the requirement to store user data." Declan McCullagh gives a fuller report at CNET. Update: 05/14 00:35 GMT by T : Note: Smith has yet to release the text of the current bill, but it seems an easy bet it will have much in common with his similar-sounding legislative push in 2007, which resulted in the unsuccessful SAFETY Act of 2009.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

132 comments

No (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123470)

No thanks.

Re:No (5, Insightful)

zoloto (586738) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123730)

I just love how everything "for the children" or anything relating to child pornography (which is absolutely despicable) can strip our rights away without notice. It's absolute bullshit.

Re:No (1)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124396)

Give me a law or police order that will remove all child pornography forever, and I'll find you a parent filming their children in jail as a sex offender.

Re:No (2)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124410)

filming their children

In the bath. I forgot to add that. fuck.

Give me a law or police order that will remove all child pornography forever, and I'll find you a parent filming their children in the bath in jail as a sex offender.

Re:No (1)

QCompson (675963) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125642)

I just love how everything "for the children" or anything relating to child pornography (which is absolutely despicable) can strip our rights away without notice. It's absolute bullshit.

It's interesting how so many boogedy-boogedy scare tactics have been used about child pornography over the years that even the mere mention of the term causes most people to use a qualifier like "which is absolutely despicable". Do you do the same when you mention murder (which is absolutely despicable) in a sentence? Or even actual child rape (which is absolutely despicable)?

Probably not.

So . . . (5, Insightful)

Seumas (6865) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123476)

If you care about privacy or security, you're either a child molester or a terrorist, I guess.

Re:So . . . (1, Troll)

Qatz (1209584) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123490)

Really? I just don;t want them snooping on me browsing shemale and transvestite porn.

Re:So . . . (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123772)

I make my own shemale porn.

Re:So . . . (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124220)

Soviet shemale porn made YOU!

Re:So . . . (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123764)

"If you care about privacy or security, you're either a child molester or a terrorist, I guess."

Or a copyright infringer. Don't forget that one.

Re:So . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124066)

If you care about privacy or security, you're either a child molester or a terrorist, I guess.

Really!!!???

Re:So . . . (1)

inKubus (199753) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124916)

Well and this sentence:

The most interesting part of this bill however is not who it targets but rather who it does not. The bill would make wireless companies exempt from the requirement to store user data.

Let's see, if I wanted to spy on people without them knowing, would I want them sending signals down twisted pair or broadcasting them in all directions? ;)

OK, now this is an example of good programming (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123494)

if (bribe.amount == 0) amendment[3].delete(); // FIXME: Remember to s/bribe/campaign\ contribution/ before public release

Re:OK, now this is an example of good programming (1)

Requiem18th (742389) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124240)

bribe.amount? Why do you have a `Bribe` class and methods and attributes does it define?

Re:OK, now this is an example of good programming (1)

chammy (1096007) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125380)

In his snip "bribe" isn't a class name. It could be a "Transaction" named "bribe" or something

Poor Idea (4, Insightful)

hinesbrad (1923872) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123514)

Wow. Once again congress, a body largely filled with old farts who has zero concept of how far reaching their laws might hit. RIAA just had an orgasm.

Re:Poor Idea (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123524)

Its not just about the RIAA.

Just wait until the rules change and they have retroactive data so can arrest you for what you did a year ago that is now illegal.

Re:Poor Idea (4, Funny)

Ingenu (2127512) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123568)

Its not just about the RIAA.

Just wait until the rules change and they have retroactive data so can arrest you for what you did a year ago that is now illegal.

Ex post facto laws are generally unenforceable. Beware of the day, however, where an ex post facto law makes ex post facto laws legal.

Re:Poor Idea (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123776)

But they'll find some way to use the logs as evidence for a seizure of your pc to look for the 'now illegal'.

Re:Poor Idea (2)

BitterOak (537666) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123860)

Ex post facto laws are generally unenforceable. Beware of the day, however, where an ex post facto law makes ex post facto laws legal.

I'm afraid it's too late. It seems ex post facto laws are legal now [wikipedia.org] , if some creative redefinitions are employed.

Re:Poor Idea (2)

Stormthirst (66538) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123592)

Oh no - I think they know EXACTLY how far reaching this kind of law is.

Re:Poor Idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125460)

Oh yeah, you know they do. Consider how the powers of the federal government are enumerated in the US Constitution. Our current society is based on the assumption that those powers were enumerated vaguely in order to prevent the powers from being limited. Every bill written by members of this society will be written with that attitude and skillful wording. It is a direct, inescapable consequence of that currently prevailing view/attitude regarding the Constitution.

Until our society takes a more stringent and conservative interpretation of those powers you can expect those powers to grow like the roots and tendrils of a vine with each piece of legislation that is passed.

Re:Poor Idea (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123630)

A top House Republican is planning to propose that Internet service providers be required to store information about their customers...

The GOP seriously needs to change it's name to The Fascist Party of Amerika.

Re:Poor Idea (3, Insightful)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123700)

I prefer American Taliban. It's more accurate, in that it captures their (ab)use of religion to justify their actions and rally the weak-minded to their cause.

The democrats are no angels, but the republicans are devils.

Re:Poor Idea (5, Insightful)

lexsird (1208192) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124790)

Sadly, this is becoming oh so true. It's come to the point that it's not just Leftwing liberal drivel, it's actually a viable statement. You will find a lot of parallels to the Nazis. I am sure the good people of Germany at the time had no idea what they were being handed until it was too late. They were indoctrinated with some very timely Nationalism, had someone to blame to galvanize them together and a unified goal with a vision. Of course it was barking mad from the top down, but nothing like a Prussian plan when it comes together.

Now here we are, the trumpets of nationalism are blowing super loud, religion is being factored in as well. Our war machine is like no other in history and we are wanting more oil, and we are at the moment seemingly poor. Hmm... Nothing like keeping those American Peasants beat down with high gas prices. They have been doing this to us for over 30 years, gouging us at the pumps and shoveling money into all the right pockets to keep it that way. We are collectively stupid enough to let them get away with it, hence they continue to.

But this "culture" has made keeping people in "order". Sweet Jesus, we bitch and moan about Chinese violations of civil rights, yet we violate our own Constitution with the Patriot Act. Our prison systems are an industry unto themselves. We have more people in prison than any other country in the world, hell, at what point do we have more people in prison than the rest of the world combined? Do you know how much money they get from us the tax payers to house these people?? This is one brilliant method of population domination.

Separation of Church and State, now that is an awesome concept, and let me explain why. It really defines the the lines of our Faith and the utility of government. Neither are suppose to toy with each other, and besides Public Service was for Public Servants, not Public Masters. The citizenry should be held in the highest of esteem, towering over, not groveling under public servants.

Government is in your Church, if you don't know this, you are ignorant. You are not held in the highest of esteem by the system, you are a lemming peasant; public servants will crush you like a bug if you look crossways at them. Don't think so? Sneer the wrong way at the wrong cop and get back to me on that. But don't worry, it's all ok. You will forget about all of this nonsense soon enough. Welcome to information bombardment with redundant contingencies for reinforcing and modifying your behavior. No, no, I don't think Fascism quiet covers it, nor do the Nazis. We are birthing an evil that is all our own, it will have our names on it and we will not share the infamy with anyone else.

What I find amazing is how all of these "right wing" people think they are "Christian". This is the irony and the tragedy of our age. I believe these are the ones warned about in the last days, that are deceived. Leave it to institutionalizing Christianity to flip it into something of the Devil. You can't become involved in politics as a church, or a faith. These are just things that shouldn't mix, ever. First of all, we don't need a middleman, and any religious organization that props one up and tells you that you do, is straight from Hell. Lets run down the highway to Hell even faster by letting these "middlemen" sell us into political prostitution.

Let's face some serious facts. If God was going to have us become political, he sure wouldn't have us associate with either of these dominate political parties. Both of these parties are teaming with heathens. If you were going to have a Party that was "for God", then you had better sure as shit make sure it's a HOLY one and without any of the typical political vermin we have lurking in Washington. Doesn't God have this particular habit of when something subpar to him is placed before him as an offering or as to "his will", that he drop kicks it in the balls? It had better be up to his standards and you had better be listening the fuck up when he talks.

Now is there anyone around that is seriously called to lead God's people in a political party? Some might think they are, but they are retarded, insane, or just plain crooks. No, God will drag some idiot out from under a rock, kicking and screaming the whole way, and prop him up just to fuck with everyone's heads. Why? Because he is God and he can do things like that. Nyaah!

But are we seeing any of that? No. Fuck no. So please, keep out of politics. When it comes to voting, watch for who wants you to vote for them. Check out what they are about, and FFS, pray about it yourself to God. His opinion>their opinion, and its about damn time you started getting your information first hand and not through these "middlemen" idiots. I blame it on laziness. It's really easy to let the preacher do your thinking and praying for you, right? Isn't that what you pay him for?? Fuckers, you have been told, it's now on you.

Re:Poor Idea (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124880)

public servants will crush you like a bug if you look crossways at them. Don't think so? Sneer the wrong way at the wrong cop and get back to me on that.

Done it. Nothing happened.

Re:Poor Idea (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124892)

The GOP is little more than the old racist democrats that flipped over back in '64 in reaction to the passage of the civil rights act. And the 'new' democratic party is really nothing more than a bunch of syndicate thugs. Both are equally fascist, under the control of big business..

SO THEN RETAIN THE USER INFO !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123522)

What's so hard about that ?? Always the crying on slashdot !! What kind of place is this anyway ??

So child porn people will just use 3g/4g internet (3, Interesting)

Rivalz (1431453) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123544)

So child porn people will have to use 3g/4g/wifi based inet to avoid being nabbed easily.
Leaving just the average joe left to get screwed by the long arm of the law.

Re:So child porn people will just use 3g/4g intern (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123608)

The average joe doesn't break the law.
I'm just saying.

Re:So child porn people will just use 3g/4g intern (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123614)

Then there's no reason to retain the average joe's info.
I'm just saying...something intelligent, unlike you.

Re:So child porn people will just use 3g/4g intern (1)

zoloto (586738) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123736)

so following that line of thought there's no reason to retain anyone's info. gotcha ;)

Re:So child porn people will just use 3g/4g intern (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123840)

Correct. They should not retain data.

Re:So child porn people will just use 3g/4g intern (1)

st0rmshad0w (412661) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123924)

Are you fucking daft? The hell he doesn't, he just either realize it or recognize it as breaking the law.

Re:So child porn people will just use 3g/4g intern (1)

WillDraven (760005) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124470)

Do you mean "the law" as in "the child porn law" or "the law" as in "any laws"? Because I can guarantee you that practically everybody in America breaks SOME law. There are so many things illegal that it's practically impossible to live as an entirely law abiding citizen.

Here's the first relevant link I came across:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574438900830760842.html [wsj.com]

Re:So child porn people will just use 3g/4g intern (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123640)

Child porn people will continue to steal wifi, like they've been doing for years.

Re:So child porn people will just use 3g/4g intern (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123652)

That's fine, LTE is faster than DSL anyway. :P

Audit trails need validation (5, Insightful)

slashqwerty (1099091) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123554)

If this passes we will see lots of innocent people prosecuted due to buggy audit trails that are never tested. Seriously, when is the last time anyone tested their audit code to make sure it works properly? If it doesn't crash the app no one worries about it. I've seen all manner of bogus data in audit trails.

Now ISPs will need audit trails on DHCP leases, connections through proxy servers, NAT translations, email senders and receivers, clock synchronizations...

Re:Audit trails need validation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123780)

I have to say, if my ISP's ability to track this data is anything like their ability to accurately record my bandwidth usage then you're probably right.

Re:Audit trails need validation (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124952)

If this passes we will see lots more innocent people prosecuted...

Despite the unemployment rate, there actually is a labor shortage. The use of prison labor will help immensely in controlling things like the costs of care for the aging baby boomers and other unskilled occupations currently using undocumented workers. Might even keep social security above water for some time to come.. We need to lock up as many people as we possibly can. An 'innocent' person is simply too difficult to manage or control. They want too much money and freedom. It's just not sustainable

Re:Audit trails need validation (1)

sincewhen (640526) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124976)

You make a good point. Wasn't there a recent kerfuffle about how inaccurate ISP metering is (which is an issue now that caps are being put in place)?
If they can't get the billing data right, what chance that they will get these logs right when they are only kept because they are mandated by the legislation?

So wait (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123560)

I lose my privacy while pedophiles start downloading child porn onto their iPhones instead?

This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (3, Informative)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123566)

This action violates my treaty rights as a Canadian Citizen.

As well as those of all EU citizens.

Which the US is signatory to by international treaty, which by force of law and the US Constitution, is of a higher level than any Congressional action or bill.

Period.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123634)

And we know from Guantanamo Bay and the how mush the USA respects the rights of citizens of other countries...

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (2)

Seumas (6865) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123638)

As an American Citizen let me inform you, across the border, that our Constitution doesn't really mean much of anything anymore.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (2)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123656)

I meant under NAFTA and FTA treaties for Canadians working legally in the US.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (1)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125698)

How exactly does NAFTA make you exempt from US's policies, when dealing with a US company on US soil? My understanding is that NAFTA provides an easy process to work in any of the three countries, and removes tariffs on traded goods. I don't recall (nor can I find) any provision requiring citizenship-based exemptions from laws.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (2)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123646)

That's not really much of an argument, the US Constitution is more important that treaties and will certainly trump those, if push comes to shove. No international agreement will ever outweigh the constitution, and if some US politician ever suggests that it does, they will rightfully be run out of office.

      It's also probably not constitutional, and it's likely a violation of the 4th amendment, and almost certainly the 10th. That argument might carry some weight.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123668)

Try actually reading the US Constitution.

See that part about International Treaties compared to Congressional Bills?

Yeah, that part says Treaties override House Bills made into laws.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123838)

Try actually reading your parent post.

He said that the Constitution trumps treaties, not that bills or laws passed by Congress do.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (1)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123956)

I have read it, twit. You might have a technical argument, but the first politician to suggest that we make our laws subservient to international treaties will be run out of town on a rail. It's a non-starter, it amounts to yielding sovereignty to someone else, and Americans *will not stand for that* under almost any circumstances.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (1)

currently_awake (1248758) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124392)

If americans don't care about the government ignoring their constitution then I very much doubt they will care about the gov signing away their rights by treaty.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (1)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124798)

They care a lot about that. Wait until 2012 and see what we think of it.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123960)

No, it doesn't. The later-in-time principle applies. I won't explain since you're obviously an attorney and a US Constitution scholar. Not sure how you missed a simple principle like later-in-time but whatever, professor.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124088)

I should clarify. The later-in-time principle does not mean a statute trumps, only that courts will read it to comply with prior treaties. If there is a section that can be read to conflict then the issue will be resolved in favor of the newest legislation. Courts assume the legislator would never make an unconstitutional or conflicting law. Same way with everything else. Courts will do everything they can to read a statute so as not to conflict. The court's interpretation then becomes law thus limiting the scope of the could-be unconstitutional law.

I'm not sure how this would conflict with NAFTA or FTA since neither give you diplomatic nor quasi-diplomatic immunity which means you are subject to the laws of the state. This is crappy legislation, to be sure, but to claim that you can live in the US and be immune from its laws because of NAFTA is dumb.

I knew a short retort wouldn't work, it's like I'll be back with a 20 page memo in 10 minutes. You do realize that law schools spend a whole semester on conflict of laws and it's never as easy as "just read the Constitution, stupid." Methinks your interpretation may not be quite accurate.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (1)

linuxrocks123 (905424) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125234)

I can't find the section you're referring to, and my research seems to indicate that laws passed by Congress supersede earlier conflicting international treaties. Perhaps you could indicate what you're referring to?

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (2)

SniperJoe (1984152) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123674)

Exactly. The Constitution is what gives the government the right to negotiate and sign binding treaties. Theoretically, no law can supersede it, however you can be damn sure they're trying.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (4, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123658)

How, exactly? What treaty says that the US laws can't apply to Canadians when they do business in the US?

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123686)

Don't worry. As the Wikileaks cables prove, if the Canadian government has any concerns about US international relations they can take those concerns to the US and have them rapidly dismissed [wikileaks.fi] so that the discussion can turn to more important things, like when Canadian law will change to better suit American corporate interests.

After the usual denouncement of the Special 301 process (which we hear every year)....

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123930)

Treaties are for declaring peace between two warring countries. Any other use of treaties is abuse, an effective tool to bypass the consent of the voters.

See also: ACTA.

HTH

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (1)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125428)

We already have the data retention directive in the EU, seems this is something similar. It hasn't been implemented here in Sweden quite yet, the Left party and the Greens managed to get it tabled for a year in parliament recently, one can always hope that now that one the architects of the whole thing is no longer in a leading position of the social democrats, they will reconsider, but I sort of doubt it, and the right wing will reconsider when hell freezes over. The government of course uses the excuse that because it's a directive we "have" to implement it (as always with directives, the back-door for unpopular legislation so the politicians at home will have someone else to blame), completely ignoring the judicial option.

Re:This violates my rights as a Canadian citizen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125718)

As well as those of all EU citizens.

Which the US is signatory to by international treaty, which by force of law and the US Constitution, is of a higher level than any Congressional action or bill.

Period.

Norway has already passed a law like this.

This is a violation of our constitutional rights. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123714)

The government has no right to require other citizens, whether natural or not to collect information in the hopes to catch an undefined crime that has yet to be determined. This is an invasion of our privacy and we need people to speak up and stop this circle jerking of our rights.

Re:This is a violation of our constitutional right (0)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123934)

Good luck with that. The teabaggers and other mentally deficient groups will just claim you're soft on kiddie porn, and probably end up arresting you sooner or later.

Re:This is a violation of our constitutional right (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124480)

Interesting viewpoint.

The general thought is the "tea baggers" are more likely to be against the child porn laws as a growth of the Federal government, and that it should be handled at a lower level.

Why am I not surprised about the excuse? (1)

Husgaard (858362) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123718)

Child pornography and terrorism have been the major excuses for taking away civil rights the last few years. And they are useful excuses, as anybody trying to oppose a proposal made with such an excuse has to suffer guilt by association, even if completely unfair.

Wireless exempt? (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123726)

Setting the issue of data retention aside for the moment, why exempt wireless providers? Bribe^H^H^H^H^HCampaign contributions?

Wouldn't this violate the Equal Protection Clause [wikipedia.org] by pursuing pedophiles with wire-based broadband while ignoring 3G equipped perverts?

Re:Wireless exempt? (1)

Loadmaster (720754) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123978)

There is nothing that says the government has to go all the way the first time. The government can make incremental steps to achieve its goals. Lee Optical.

But, yeah, probably money.

How Much Data Is This and What Will This Cost? (1)

MAurelius (565652) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123778)

Can anyone with relevant experience at a major ISP give an estimate of how big the 90-day rolling logfile would be for even one company? Would it be terabytes/million subscribers and exabytes for an entire country? Do any of the major ISPs have the infrastructure to store this much information at the moment? Imagine the electrical power needed to store this much (mostly useless) information--not exactly environmentally friendly. Perhaps a Beowulf cluster could... (ducks)

Re:How Much Data Is This and What Will This Cost? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123898)

I highly recommend those Chinese USB memory stick on ebay for the ISP to store their log data.

Re:How Much Data Is This and What Will This Cost? (1)

tnk1 (899206) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124284)

It's actually not as much data as you would think. I managed a site that did hundreds of millions of hits per day, and our daily apache access logs together were about 7GB on average. And that includes all of the junk that you would expect in an httpd log like originating IP, date, access time, return code and destination URL for every transaction, even the ones that you didn't manually initiate. It's a lot of text, for sure, but 90 days of that would be less than a cheap 1TB SATA drive.

A major ISP would have a lot more transactions per user, but honestly how many actual sites do you hit per day even if you work all day in front of a computer? And even counting the various load requests for images and scripts and pop-up ads, you're probably not accessing more than a few hundred URLs in that time, maybe a few thousand, if you are particularly active or hitting particularly complex web sites, bearing in mind that repeat calls for images/data will go to cache and not outside.

With a moderate data warehousing project using cheap disk for storage and a barebones logging format, the data storage is doable. The only real issue I can think of is how it might tax router CPU cycles and/or I/O to have to generate a report on every transaction and output it to a file for storage. Routing equipment these days is very good, but something that widespread would still probably be noticeable.

Re:How Much Data Is This and What Will This Cost? (1)

Stupendoussteve (891822) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124542)

Hundreds of millions of hits is every Internet user in the US going to one or two sites. Billions to the tens of billions is more likely the kind of daily transaction records you're looking at if it's HTTP. The story appears to say it would be IP address mappings, which sounds much more manageable and may even end up with more users getting the pseudo-static IP addresses that some ISPs use (my IP hasn't changed in years, despite power outages and Internet disruption).

Re:How Much Data Is This and What Will This Cost? (1)

spudthepotatofreak (649917) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125628)

If this bill actually happens, I'll have to make it a point to waste as much of my ISP's disk space as possible.

Canada (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123782)

You mean like the exact same bill that is going through Canada right now because of the god damn conservatives. This is why a majority government is never a good thing for canadian citizens. At least then the crazy crackpot theories that each individual party has gets muddied down instead of being passed into legislation.
(Liberals tried to introduce the same thing in 2006 and failed. Now this bill is being passed as part of a large omnibus bill because it would never pass on its own).

Have a look here: http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/05/05/lilley-tory-crime-bill-an-attack-on-our-liberty

There are less sensationalist examples out there, but I couldn't find one today. (I believe Michael Geist goes into more detail).

Child Porn always an excuse for 1984 ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123798)

Why is "Child Pornography" Cited as a reason for any new Big Brother Internet legislation?

Re:Child Porn always an excuse for 1984 ! (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125236)

Child pornography and terrorism are the standard pretenses.
At least the Russians are trying to do something different. They're citing websites about illegal drugs as their reason to pull off shit like that.

Jobs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123814)

Didn't the Repubs take Congress on the promise of creating more jobs? Their legislation certainly doesn't indicate they're doing much.

Minority Report (2)

kronnek (982486) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123882)

How is this any different than having a goverment employee assigned to keep track of what you are doing every moment of the day, just in case you do commit a crime? God I love this country...

Not Nazi Enough (2)

b4upoo (166390) | more than 2 years ago | (#36123910)

How can we call ourselves free without requiring our family members an children to turn us all into the Gestapo, I mean police, I mean the recording industry.

Re:Not Nazi Enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125410)

The word you seek is STASI [wikipedia.org] .

The TRUE Culprits (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36123916)

I would be curious to see how much the MPAA/RIAA spent in lobbying for this. My gut reaction is that this is truly the doing of "Big Copyright", veiled in the always-righteous crusade against child pr0n.

There are ISPs outside the US? Inconceivable! (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124096)

I just imagine the look of total shock on their faces when someone tells them their laws dont actually effect the rest of the world where the Internet resides.

Re:There are ISPs outside the US? Inconceivable! (2)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125244)

It's only a matter of time.
The real people behind this are currently trying to shove the same stuff down the population of other countries (e.g., EU nations like Spain and Germany). After that it won't be long until there's something like the agreement to share SWIFT transaction data.

SAFETY Act of 2009 failed early (1)

schwit1 (797399) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124184)

It never got out of committee. But now Lamar Smith is the chair.
Lamar Smith [R-TX21] chair
John Conyers [D-MI14] ranking Democrat

Sandy Adams [R-FL24]
Howard Berman [D-CA28]
Steven Chabot [R-OH1]
Jason Chaffetz [R-UT3]
Judy Chu [D-CA32]
Howard Coble [R-NC6]
Steve Cohen [D-TN9]
Ted Deutch [D-FL19]
Randy Forbes [R-VA4]
Trent Franks [R-AZ2]
Elton Gallegly [R-CA24]
Louis Gohmert [R-TX1]
Robert Goodlatte [R-VA6]
Trey Gowdy [R-SC4]
Tim Griffin [R-AR2]
Darrell Issa [R-CA49]
Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX18]
Henry Johnson [D-GA4]
Jim Jordan [R-OH4]
Steve King [R-IA5]
Zoe Lofgren [D-CA16]
Daniel Lungren [R-CA3]
Thomas Marino [R-PA10]
Jerrold Nadler [D-NY8]
Mike Pence [R-IN6]
Ted Poe [R-TX2]
Ben Quayle [R-AZ3]
Mike Quigley [D-IL5]
Tom Reed [R-NY29]
Dennis Ross [R-FL12]
Linda Sánchez [D-CA39]
Robert Scott [D-VA3]
James Sensenbrenner [R-WI5]
Debbie Wasserman Schultz [D-FL20]
Maxine Waters [D-CA35]
Melvin Watt [D-NC12]

Constant Vigilance (2)

MrKaos (858439) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124282)

Seems to me that democracy has been under intense attack in the legislature for the last ten years now. I'm not saying that it hasn't happened before there just seems to be another one of these bills presented every month or so in all the western democracies not just the US. It often leaves me wondering what the agenda is and, more importantly, who's agenda it is?

Most of the time the really offensive proposals include a variation on the theme "to combat child pornography" to frame anyone who opposes it as someone who support child pornography. Seems to me that we are becoming a Democracy in theory but not in practice, maybe we always have.

Re:Constant Vigilance (2)

rts008 (812749) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125572)

To crudely paraphrase a somewhat famous quote, by someone I have forgotten:
'The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.', or something like that.

I do agree with your comment overall, but the second part of your last sentence I have an issue with.

Seems to me that we are becoming a Democracy in theory but not in practice, maybe we always have.

[my emphasis]

IMHO, we have not always had this problem. It seems to me that this started shortly after we developed career politicians.

Once we eliminated the stress/hardship of being away from the day to day means of making a living to attend the legislature, it became easier for our politicians to become disconnected from their constituents/the 'common man', and whore themselves[their influence] out to the deepest pockets.
The only concern they really have since then is getting re-elected.

Until term limits are imposed on them, I don't see this changing.
Oh, and campaign contributions by corps and industries don't help the situation either,IMHO.

I see all of this as a reaction to the latter 1960's and early 1970's.
I'm assuming[hopefully] by your /. UID that you might have been around back then.
It was a turbulent time in the USA:
The Vietnam War, and all of the protests, sit-ins, Kent State riots, anarchist groups, terrorists hijacking airliners, etc., with the Feds caught off guard and having to react[at least from their point of view].

Or, maybe I'm just an armchair sociologist that has it wrong. I don't know for sure. :-)

Re:Constant Vigilance (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125816)

Once we eliminated the stress/hardship of being away from the day to day means of making a living to attend the legislature, it became easier for our politicians to become disconnected from their constituents/the 'common man', and whore themselves[their influence] out to the deepest pockets.

Once the government got a big enough budget that bribing government officials to get a piece of it became immensely profitable, it became easier for out politicians to become disconnected from their constituents/the 'common man'...

As long as there are trillions on the table to be divied up, there will be people willing to spend hundreds of millions to get a piece of the action.

How will this stop... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124328)

criminals that use tor, or any sort of system that encrypts traffic and passes it off to multiple nodes before it reaches a destination?

Re:How will this stop... (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125266)

Tor, Freenet, i2p, take your pick.

Something like this will simply lead to the creation of more technologies like that, making it harder for law enforcement agencies to catch real criminals.

For or against Privacy? (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125316)

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Either we're outraged at the level of privacy invasion perpetrated by big business, and should out-law cookies / require a do-not-track opt out -- OR -- We require big business to record the browsing habits of citizens for many years, just in case anyone wants to have a look.... BUT WE CAN'T HAVE BOTH.

Re:For or against Privacy? (1)

Confusador (1783468) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125434)

I'd say this is one of those cases where you don't want to push the dilemma on them too hard, because we know which horn they'd take.

The eternal Jew... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125600)

I did warn you. The Jews are at it full tilt - they want to control everything you say, so that you can't talk about THEM - you know, the people who are actually behind this bill, the people who are destroying your country from within, leeching off you like the Talmudic parasites that they are...

Do you know that it's illegal to even SAY a word against Jews, in much of the West? There are people in prison, right now, for questioning 'the holocaust', for merely asking 'awkward' questions about it... What are the Jews afraid of? That their 'cattle' will find out that they are being used as slaves, that's what.

Load More 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...