So... what do you think of this???



House OKs life sentences for hackers

By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
July 15, 2002, 6:00 PM PT


WASHINGTON--The House of Representatives on Monday overwhelmingly approved a bill that would allow for life prison sentences for malicious computer hackers.
By a 385-3 vote, the House approved a computer crime bill that also expands police ability to conduct Internet or telephone eavesdropping without first obtaining a court order.

The Bush administration had asked Congress to approve the Cyber Security Enhancement Act (CSEA) as a way of responding to electronic intrusions, denial of service attacks and the threat of "cyber-terrorism." The CSEA had been written before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks last year, but the events spurred legislators toward Monday evening's near-unanimous vote.

CSEA, the most wide-ranging computer crime bill to make its way through Congress in years, now heads to the Senate. It's not expected to encounter any serious opposition, although there's not much time for senators to consider the measure because they take August off and are expected to head home for the year around Oct. 1.

"Until we secure our cyber infrastructure, a few keystrokes and an Internet connection is all one needs to disable the economy and endanger lives," sponsor Lamar Smith, R-Tex., said earlier this year. "A mouse can be just as dangerous as a bullet or a bomb."

Smith heads a subcommittee on crime, which held hearings that drew endorsements of CSEA from a top Justice Department official and executives from Microsoft and WorldCom. Citing privacy concerns, civil liberties groups have objected to portions of CSEA.

At the urging of the Justice Department, Smith's subcommittee voted in February to rewrite CSEA. It now promises life terms for computer intrusions that "recklessly" put others' lives at risk.

A committee report accompanying the legislation predicts: "A terrorist or criminal cyber attack could further harm our economy and critical infrastructure. It is imperative that the penalties and law enforcement capabilities are adequate to prevent and deter such attacks."

By rewriting wiretap laws, CSEA would allow limited surveillance without a court order when there is an "ongoing attack" on an Internet-connected computer or "an immediate threat to a national security interest." That kind of surveillance would, however, be limited to obtaining a suspect's telephone number, IP address, URLs or e-mail header information--not the contents of online communications or telephone calls.

Under federal law, such taps can take place when there's a threat of "serious bodily injury to any person" or activity involving organized crime.

Another section of CSEA would permit Internet providers to disclose the contents of e-mail messages and other electronic records to police in cases involving serious crimes.

Currently it's illegal for an Internet provider to "knowingly divulge" what users do except in some specific circumstances, such as when it's troubleshooting glitches, receiving a court order or tipping off police that a crime is in progress. CSEA expands that list to include when "an emergency involving danger of death or serious physical injury to any person requires disclosure of the information without delay."

Clint Smith, the president of the U.S. Internet Service Providers Association, endorsed the concept earlier this year.

Smith testified that CSEA builds on the controversial USA Patriot act, which Congress enacted last fall. He said that this portion of CSEA "will reduce impediments to ISP cooperation with law enforcement."

The Free Congress Foundation, which opposes CSEA, criticized Monday evening's vote.

"Congress should stop chipping away at our civil liberties," said Brad Jansen, an analyst at the conservative group. "A good place to start would be to substantially revise (CSEA) to increase, not diminish, oversight and accountability by the government."

If the Senate also approves CSEA, the new law would also:

• Require the U.S. Sentencing Commission to revise sentencing guidelines for computer crimes. The commission would consider whether the offense involved a government computer, the "level of sophistication" shown and whether the person acted maliciously.

• Formalize the existence of the National Infrastructure Protection Center. The center, which investigates and responds to both physical and virtual threats and attacks on America's critical infrastructure, was created in 1998 by the Department of Justice, but has not been authorized by an act of Congress. The original version of CSEA set aside $57.5 million for the NIPC; the final version increases the NIPC's funding to $125 million for the 2003 fiscal year.

• Specify that an existing ban on the "advertisement" of any device that is used primarily for surreptitious electronic surveillance applies to online ads. The prohibition now covers only a "newspaper, magazine, handbill or other publication."

Most industry associations, including the Business Software Alliance, the Association for Competitive Technology, the Information Technology Association of America, and the Information Technology Industry Council, have endorsed most portions of CSEA.

fucking outrageous!

aren't there privacy laws in the us?

I Never Knew they weren't tapping? the Ghost of J.Edgar Hoover never left huh??

Sad and scary
...if the authorities could stop using the bullshit catch phrases "in defense of freedom" or "we're defending democracy"--I could tolerate it(like i really have a choice).

Freedom of what? Freedom to have your phone or computer tapped anytime the police feel like it.
What democracy? These goons are elected by whatever lobbying group has their hand up that politician's a-hole at any given time.


If the US Govt were just straight up and said "We trust you about as much as we trust Ohsama binn Ladden himself...eat shit and die" I would be much happier.

...Why do i get the feeling that we lose more from the aftermath of Sept 11 than anyone else, all in the defense of 'liberty'.
Define 'liberty' and then tell me what we're defending...or destroying.
[This message was edited Tue Jul 16 11:25:59 PDT 2002 by mrchristian]

Think of all the hackers that are tapping into your phone lines, emails, etc. They're just as much of a threat and invasion to your privacy.

While it may sound scary for the Government to be doing this, theres already tons of hackers out there doing the same thing.

Sounds like they're trying to fight fire with fire. The only time I would have cared if anyone was listening in on my converastions was back when I did drugs. Nowdays I could care less if they wanna hear me flirt with someone on the phone LOL.

We're kind of fucked either way.

All me to quote Charles Manson, yet again:

"The police used to watch over the people, now they're watching the people." - Charles Manson

~~2the9s quietly stops parading around in assless pants in the privacy of his own home~~

2the9s said:

! what's with u and those pants!!??

all over, all over, all over

2the9s said:

"You've still got it, dude!" - Some fish character on Spongebob.

subyduby said:

He will send you pictures if you ask very nicely...

great MORE hackers.

online ain't the only resources terrorist have.

meeting ppl. in the park, new converts, etc. will invite terroism.

I think its good. If you ain't breaking the law, you got nothing to worry about.

If you don't like the law, get into politics, make a stand or fuck off out of the country and go live elsewhere.

They may not have broadband connections in Indonesia, but you can watch you kiddie porn and make bombs to your hearts content.

subyduby said:

suby, they were a gift from jnoel's moms.

IceNine said:

Basically the U.S. government already has been.

Really, the National Security Agency (NSA), the super secret electronic and signal intelligence agency (which is larger than the CIA and FBI combined) has geomesic domes or radar dishes around the world and are picking up trillions of bits of info (phones [except satellite phones I believe], faxes, etc.) being sent out constantly. Emails I believe are picked up but it's alot harder.

They have a huge dish outside the NSA the size of a football field that picks up transmissions as well. The loads of info are stored underground in computers (Echeleon), the fastest and which hold the most memory in the world... Only problem is there's so much sheer information being downloaded constantly, the analyists can't keep up.

Over ten years ago, I read if one were to mention certain keywords on the phone, (like at present, Al Queda, kill the president, etc.), the recording would be flagged. Again, these are signals being picked up around the world, a massive operation that is truly mindboggling. They have the most advanced toys in the world. Likewise, the U.S. government is developing tiny microscopic computers. They have research and development groups doing tests on living DNA to actually GROW computers. Think future cyborgs. All this info can be found in BODY OF SECRETS by James Bamford. It basically gives a history lesson, the real info to give you an idea of where the NSA is headed can be found in the last chapter.

Which begs the question...

Will you be flagged for checking out the book at your local library?

That's been a standard FBI m.o. in the past for certain books.

But really, all this information being collected, is the average citizen's life under a watchful eye? Unless you're breaking the law, who's going to take the time and energy and search through this information to look up Joe Blow in Liberty, MO? The fear is really some power control freak getting their hands on this stuff and manipulating the system for their own ends, which is scary...

Doesn't surprise me at all. I told y'all, fasten your seatbelt. You're about to see some shit go down that would've given George Orwell insomnia and sent him immediatley into therapy - And everyone calls me a cynic.

Read THIS:

http://www.washingtontime...882632.htm

EVERYBODY needs to get over this idea that "if you have nothing to hide, what are you worried about?"

herbthe4 said:

Yeah... that is another good one... I don't like the sound of it too much...

IceNine said:

...Nor should you. We are being played. The thing that gets me is how willing so many of us are to go along with it, and if we don't, we are automatically branded "the enemy"; unpatriotic, Anti-American "liberals" who need to wake up.

We are all doomed.

General Discussion Lives!

bonojr said:[quote]

IceNine said:

It's true, and we can't have it both ways. If something explodes in Grand Central Station or on The Mall in D.C., everyone will be clamoring and hollering, all the way up Bush's ass, asking why we didn't know, how we could've prevented it and what the hell everyone knew before the explosion.

The trouble is that it doesn't take a very active imagination to envision all of this shit 'crossing over", illicting a phone call and a blowing whistle every time one of us reads "subversive literature", orders "obscene" material through the mail or shows an interest in "offensive" forms of entertainment - things I am persnally of "guilty" on every level.

Shit, any Prince material could EASILY wind up on a list like this.

Be worried.

"He who would give up up Liberty in the interest of security deserves neither' - Ben Franklin

herbthe4 said:[quote]

bonojr said:

You have hit the nail directly on the head...

One only needs to look at agencies such as the FBI in the Hoover era to see what can happen when law enforcement agencies get too much power...

What about McCarthy and his pal Roy Cohn?

The point is that bad things are bound to happen when the government starts watching the people instead of watching over them.*


*This sentence was based on a statement by Charles Manson

"The police used to watch over the people, now they're watching the people." - Charles Manson

Oh, by the way... the government probably has me on a list somewhere...

I used to publish a website dedicated to serial killers and the psychopathology associated with their acts. I had many excerpts from books by John Douglass and Robert Ressler, as well as quotes from the FBI Crime Classifications Handbook.

I also had a freethinkers website going... lots of great stuff... TONS of subversive material was to be had...

I got tired of the rather large amount of hate mail that I got from religious types and was also sick of writing new stuff, so I closed both of the sites... but the government could easily have me on some wonderfully unconstitutional list somewhere.

IceNine said:[quote]

herbthe4 said:

...and who will watch the watchers?

When the shit hits the fan, I want Ice9 in my bunker.

GD is alive!

(Prince is the man.) - to keep thread on topic

BTW: What if all this went on we were all listening to "Darling Nikki"? What kind of "List" would we be on? What list are we on now?

Fuck em'. If I'm not on "the list" by now, I've done something wrong. if I'm not on it, I need to try harder.

Remember Nixon's "enemies list?" It included people like John Lennon, Barbara Streisand and Jane Fonda.

Also, the maximum possible sentence in the US now for computer crime (hacking) has been extended to LIFE imprisonment. Guess what country I won't be moving to any time soon?!

There are other reasons. Being a technologist and computer scientist by profession, it would be completely impossible for me to do my job in the US, due to the DMCA. How can you innovate in a country that allows patenting of software "concepts" and algorithms? How can you innovate when the very act of reverse engineering a security mechanism makes you a criminal?

It really is a ludicrous situation.

herbthe4 said:

Well... I can see the Barbara Streisand part at least...

Life imprisonment for computer hacking in the US? What a bunch of pussies! Nothing less than torture and public execution is suitable for those bastards. Bring back the guillotine - no, still too good. Death by chainsaw - it's the only way to save civilisation!!

ian said:

Yes. And if you STEAL millions (billions) of dollars from your investors and rape your employees retirement funds, lay them all off and break the very rules that YOU (not YOU personally, IAN) helped write, you can parachute to safety in a golden mansion in Florida, illiciting nothing more from law enforcement than "stricter guidelines" and a general "crackdown". How can these people (the TRUE criminals) be punished when they buy and sell the people elected to enforce the laws?

VOTE THIRD PARTY! NOW! YOU ARE NOT WASTING YOUR VOTE! There is no such thing! And how in the hell that idea ever got sold to us is a testament of the power of the status quo!

I'm surprised somebody hasn't switched off their TV long enough to go burn that fucking mansion in Florida down by now.

Oops. I'm on the list!

Prince is the best.

GD lives!

herbthe4 said:

I am a member of the Libertarian Party and I vote (obviously) for Libertarians unless they don't seem to know what is going on... I will vote for Libertarians, Republicans, Democrats, Greens, etc. based on who seems most qualified for the job.

Don't think of voting for a third-party candidate as "throwing your vote away." Your vote counts and believe me, there are people out there looking at the numbers...


EDIT: ...and Prince is good.

...
[This message was edited Tue Jul 16 15:58:59 PDT 2002 by IceNine]

A poignant quote from Invader Zim's school teacher:

"We're all doomed, doomed, dooomeed, dooomeed, dooomeed, dooomeeed..." you get the idea.

These so-called "criminals" are mainly revolutionary anarchists (at least in their own heads). They are performing the very necessary social function called 'redistributing wealth'. Governments used to do this, until a conspiracy of junk-bond speculators undermined them. The US was built on the three virtues of robbery, genocide and exploitation - the 'hackers' are in fact solid US citizens performing good works for the benefit of society. They should be rewarded, not punished. I suggest free weekend accomodation at a 5 star hotel, and free whores, a la the Crown Prince of Brunei.

narcotizedmind said:

What? The ends justifies the means?

Then again, maybe you're right. But, like I said, who will watch the watchers?

I disagree on the 3 issues that the USA was built on. I've always, perhaps naivley, asumed that it had to do with religous freedom, taxation without representation and the idea that citizens should own the Government. But I suspect we passed that off ramp a long time ago.