[Kosh]

http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6091942.html?part=rss&tag=6091942&subj=news

The FBI has drafted sweeping legislation that would require Internet service providers to create wiretapping hubs for police surveillance and force makers of networking gear to build in backdoors for eavesdropping, CNET News.com has learned.

Sounds like **** starting to hit the fan to me guys, what do you think?

[Bobboau]

it'll end up backfireing in the form of ether or both:

it provideing a way for anyone doing things they shouldn't being able to know they are getting spyed upon and robly being able to block it

getting back hacked and allowing hackers to use the spying tools them selves.

[karajorma]

The US government tries this every few years. The ISPs tell them it costs to much money and to **** off and the government realise that their bluff has been called and give up again.

Not that we can be complacent about it cause that's why they keep trying it. One day they hope we'll be so sick of this **** coming up every few years that we'll ignore it and allow them to pass it.

[Solatar]

This seems like one of those things where I'm not going to worry about it, but definantly keep an eye out for developments from it that might make me worry.

[Dark Hunter]

It'd definitely backfire. Hackers have beaten the government system before, they can do again.

[pecenipicek]

this is one of the perfect *failure to care imminent* moments....

[TopAce]

Wiretapping again. It's inherently doomed: 1st Amendment; Freedom of speech. Period.

[aldo_14]

Wiretapping again. It's inherently doomed: 1st Amendment; Freedom of speech. Period.

Hah!  The protections of the Constitution are no threat to the Glorious Defenders of Freedom!

[Kosh]

Wiretapping again. It's inherently doomed: 1st Amendment; Freedom of speech. Period.

Wait until they finish stacking the Supreme Court and Congress with more yes-men......

[Flipside]

I don't see any company willingly opening a back-door to their servers, the risks of running a server these days is bad enough, what with DoS attacks etc, no-one is going to take steps that would make hacking a site even easier.

As has been said before, any move like this is doomed to backfire, back-hacking is a real risk, and companies would resist any law like this. It would be the Corporations vs Big Brother, and, at least at the moment, the Corporations would win.

[Grug]

There are a lot of tools on the market these days to prevent / counter Denial of Service attacks etc. of the problem is lazy web programmers just not fully validating all data, and not vigorously testing their servers.

I'd very much doubt any company willingly accepting to leave a potential loop hole in their servers.

[Flipside]

Oh indeed, there are plenty of ways to defend against a DoS attack, however, the fact they are taking place in the first place just goes to show that people are constantly looking for a way to muck around with Internet services, it's one of the more curious aspects of Human Nature

I swear there's a yet to be discovered aspect of the human brain called the 'Paininthearsium' which means that the moment anonymity is achieved, it injects pheremones into the system that make you want to ruin everyone elses' day, offend people and probably join a chat room somewhere...

[Grug]

LoL, Indeed.

of things would work perfectly if people didn't screw around with them intentionally or mistakenly. It's just those dastardly annoying human traits that are in us all.

I was surprised when I first started learning about networks, viruses and vulnerabilities etc. First, at how easy it was to do, and then at how often easy yet tedious it is to prevent such things.

Its where I grew my (partial) respect for Microsoft. They attempt to make working products, then people set about making them fail maliciously on purpose. While they do work on an ongoing release and patch mentality, (which can and is annoying at times) they do it to be where they are now; one of the greatest enterprises ever. Its plain business sense.

I guess when it comes down to it, I learnt to take a large does of salt with all the "M$ is evil" screams from the mostly adolescent community, who in reality, understand little of the workings and reasons behind the IT industry.

[aldo_14]

Oh indeed, there are plenty of ways to defend against a DoS attack, however, the fact they are taking place in the first place just goes to show that people are constantly looking for a way to muck around with Internet services, it's one of the more curious aspects of Human Nature

I swear there's a yet to be discovered aspect of the human brain called the 'Paininthearsium' which means that the moment anonymity is achieved, it injects pheremones into the system that make you want to ruin everyone elses' day, offend people and probably join a chat room somewhere...

Hello!

[Wobble73]

Oh indeed, there are plenty of ways to defend against a DoS attack, however, the fact they are taking place in the first place just goes to show that people are constantly looking for a way to muck around with Internet services, it's one of the more curious aspects of Human Nature

I swear there's a yet to be discovered aspect of the human brain called the 'Paininthearsium' which means that the moment anonymity is achieved, it injects pheremones into the system that make you want to ruin everyone elses' day, offend people and probably join a chat room somewhere...

Hello!

That's funny Aldo! I was thinking of you when I read it! 

[karajorma]

Wiretapping again. It's inherently doomed: 1st Amendment; Freedom of speech. Period.

Not to nitpick but it's the fourth amendment (unreasonable searches) that prevents wiretapping. The first amendment just gives you the freedom to say whatever you want without being punished for it (within certain limits). If you're plotting to blow something up the first amendment doesn't apply but the fourth amendment very easily could.

Didn't want you blowing an exam question on this one

[TopAce]

Wiretapping again. It's inherently doomed: 1st Amendment; Freedom of speech. Period.

Not to nitpick but it's the fourth amendment (unreasonable searches) that prevents wiretapping. The first amendment just gives you the freedom to say whatever you want without being punished for it (within certain limits). If you're plotting to blow something up the first amendment doesn't apply but the fourth amendment very easily could.

Didn't want you blowing an exam question on this one

Yes, I knew that, I just don't know how I wanted this to have a relation to freedom of speech. Oh.