PDA

View Full Version : Privacy Snooping



Darth Maestro
2006-Jan-26, 04:53 PM
Greetings! I hope everyone has had great skies to gaze upon recently.

I came accross an article on cbc news online about google censoring content in certain search results in China. "The Chinese government censors content that is considered politically sensitive and offensive. As a result, online users have been blocked from using Google or experienced delays in response time." From this article was a link to another headlined "Internet firms comply with U.S. government snooping". This was quite informative and brought to my attention the possibility of the existence of an electronic eavesdropping network called Echelon which is operated by intelligence services in the U.S., U.K., Australia, New Zealand and Canada. What are the implications or intentions of an organization like this. "unprecedented glimpse into people's private thoughts and habits"

If this post is not in the right forum I aplologize in advance to the mod who has to move it. ;)

Cheers
DM

NEOWatcher
2006-Jan-26, 05:00 PM
snip What are the implications or intentions of an organization like this.
I would think that in this forum, that question would be teetering on political thin ice. Now if you were wondering if it exists, or how it would work, that would be a different story.

Moose
2006-Jan-26, 05:00 PM
Well, this will either get moved into Conspiracy Theories or be locked as being too political.

I will limit my answer to this:

China getting Google to censor results: true.
Google refusing to cooperate with request for search data: true.
Other content providers with large search engines having turned over such data: true.
Carnivore: true.
Echelon, in that a system with that name exists: probably true.
NSA being both active and effective: almost certainly true.

Big conspiracy surrounding Echelon as described, probably false.
... Involving countries other than the US, including Canada, Australia and New Zealand? Definitely false.
... Involving the UK, probably false.

Gruesome
2006-Jan-26, 05:04 PM
For what it's worth, here's the Wiki page on Eschelon...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eschelon

Dr Nigel
2006-Jan-26, 06:15 PM
Sounds like something out of "Alias" to me. Even the name is the same.

mickal555
2006-Jan-26, 09:02 PM
It's in the guiness book of records too...

:shifty::shifty:

Fr. Wayne
2006-Jan-26, 09:38 PM
I don't get it. I've been always of the notion that computers and cell phones were up front about the fact that the patent holders retained the rights to snoop on their products and from time to time allow anyone they darn please to do so (in writing of course).

Moose
2006-Jan-26, 09:53 PM
Fr. Wayne, along that logic, the contractor who constructed your house retains the right to enter at will, though perhaps not to raid the fridge.

No, patent holders most definitely do not, and have never held any special right to snoop on the users of "their" product. That's not to say they don't try to assert such rights, but those attempts rarely stand up in court, when challenged.

Fr. Wayne
2006-Jan-26, 10:36 PM
To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, Microsoft may monitor your e-mail, or other electronic communications and may disclose such information in the event it has a good faith reason to believe it is necessary for purposes of ensuring your compliance with this Agreement, and protecting the rights, property, and interests of the Microsoft Parties or any customer of a Microsoft Party. (I hope this is legal to copy) -taken from terms of agreement.

And for cell phones :It's illegal for unauthorized people to intercept your calls, but such interceptions can occur. (N.B. the word "unauthorized.)

Of course most patent holders don't deal with the FCC, so I amend my earlier comment from "the patent..." to "these patent" . OK? Cool.

Moose
2006-Jan-26, 10:54 PM
That agreement has never been tested in court in the US, to my knowledge, but I've heard legal opinion (mostly in the UK, but not exclusively) that suggests "shrink wrap" agreements are unenforcable.

Fr. Wayne
2006-Jan-26, 11:18 PM
That's cool. Here something about snooping just in.
The great axiom of privacy was always "a man's home is his castle." To which now would be appended, "If he needs a castle, he must be up to no good, so let's search the place and bring him in for questioning."

Maybe I'd better rehearse another conversation.

"Grandpa, what's 'privacy'?"

"Get out of the way, Andy. You're blocking my view of the television _ and its view of me."

http://www.infowars.com/articles/bb/say_goodbye_privacy.htm At least it is humorous, I hope.

soylentgreen
2006-Jan-27, 03:10 AM
Here something about snooping just in.
The great axiom of privacy was always "a man's home is his castle." To which now would be appended, "If he needs a castle, he must be up to no good, so let's search the place and bring him in for questioning."


So, those nefarious chinese needed the wall to hide from socially concerned mongols. Hmmm.

Fr. Wayne
2006-Jan-27, 05:07 PM
So, those nefarious chinese needed the wall to hide from socially concerned mongols. Hmmm.

Headline Somewhere? : Firewall comes down in China, Mongols blamed. :dance:

LurchGS
2006-Jan-27, 11:48 PM
The shrinkwrap agreements were held to be unenforcable here in the states, too.. On the other hand, MOST use-agreements are unenforcable - relying on the good will of either party.

As far as a global infosleuth systems - personally (without any real evidence) I have no doubt it exists. Postulating its existance, I have no doubt that the various member nations of "the Empire" (UK, Canada, NZ and OZ) take an active role in it.

Any place there's an information choke-point, there's probably a siphon.

Candy
2006-Jan-28, 10:34 AM
I sometimes listen to incoming reservation calls for my company. Of course, we let you know that your call may be monitored for quality control. You'd be amazed at what people say and/or do while they "think" they are on hold. Depending on which way I decide to tap in on a call, I can either hear the agent or the customer side of the conversation. :o

Doesn't Google do something similar with Germany and Nazi associated websites? I thought I read this is the same "article" the OP is discussing. :shifty:

mickal555
2006-Jan-31, 10:32 AM
somepeople listen in when your on hold??!?


...crap

NEOWatcher
2006-Jan-31, 12:45 PM
somepeople listen in when your on hold??!?
...crap
I guess you don't get "Monk" down there. That was an episode with Jason Alexander.

SeanF
2006-Jan-31, 04:55 PM
I guess you don't get "Monk" down there. That was an episode with Jason Alexander.
I was just going to point that out! :)

HenrikOlsen
2006-Feb-02, 02:16 PM
China getting Google to censor results: true.
I've noticed lots of talk about this, most of it treating this as if it's something new.
Yes Candy, the contents filtering in Google searches was actually started in Germany, where the laws about what you can show about Nazism is extremely strict, so Google had to implement filtering there.
This is the initial reason why the google.de site was set up and the whole mechanism of redirecting you from google.com to a site local to your country was implemented.