The US federal government is given increased authority to monitor the Internet
Earlier this month President Bush signed a directive that gives the National Security Agency (NSA) and other intelligence agencies to monitor Internet traffic to protect all government computer systems. As the Washington Post reports, this is causing particular concern because the NSA's focus has traditionally been on overseas activity, not domestic.
Why does this matter? Consider:
Allowing a spy agency to monitor domestic networks is worrisome, said James X. Dempsey, policy director of the Center for Democracy and Technology. "We're concerned that the NSA is claiming such a large role over the security of unclassified systems," he said. "They are a spy agency as well as a communications security agency. They operate in total secrecy. That's not necessary and not the most effective way to protect unclassified systems."
I'm not paranoid but I'm with Nick Carr on this one: we'll never know just what is being monitored, or how, or why.
That's a bit worrisome.
It's partly of concern because it's only a matter of time before the power is expanded to monitor all domestic networks. After all (and as the article points out), much of the most dangerous Internet activity would be against private enterprises. Bringing down or stealing data from Visa, American Express, and other such companies could do much more damage than launching a denial of service attack against the Environmental Protection Agency.
All we have right now is the fact that the authority has yet to be granted to monitor such networks. Again, I'm not a privacy freak but I'm a wee bit concerned once the government starts to spend an inordinate amount of time looking inward rather than outward.
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
I don't think they, the government, necessarily need look inward nor outward... they need to exist as they/we are-- and percieve, from that position, with a warm heart directed by a mindful eye.
With the exception of encrypting your traffic, there is nothing you can do that would cause them the least amount of difficulty. A desktop computer can monitor and report on the daily Internet traffic of several thousands of individuals.
Armed with our tax dollars they have no problem buying the resources needed to look up the skirts of all Americans.
The only effective action you can take against actions like this is in the voting booth.
"Papers please. Sir, these papers don't appear to be in order, Karl would you escort this gentleman to the search room? He'll need a full fisted cavity search."
I wonder what contractors will benefit from this?
Thats what our government caters to now, big business.
-
by eyebee3
April 27, 2009 1:17 PM PDT
- I voted for Obama hoping that he'd change the current spying situation. Instead he is like all the other politicians who think that having government entities spying on US citizens will make is safer.
-
Reply to this comment
-
(9 Comments)I bet you 1000 bucks that the nsa (and other agency) spying will become the pipeline of choice for sealing information from US companies. Tax agents look at tax records of Will Smith and sell them to the inquirer.... Police officers print arrest records and sell them to new york times reporters... When it is easy for the .gov to spy on your company, how long do you think it'll be before your industrial secrets are sold to the highest bidder....
There are plenty of J. Edgar Hoovers in the .gov today waiting to make hay by bartering your secrets... For sure...
We'll be less-safe for giving our privacy away .... anyone who doubts this, is burying their head in the sand hoping for the best.