April 14, 2006 4:03 AM PDT

ISP snooping gaining support

(continued from previous page)

Waters said that Comcast was unable to help police in an investigation dealing with the rape of a 2-year-old child because logs are routinely deleted as is standard business practice. "We'd like to see one year minimum" for data retention, Waters said. "Two years would be even better."

Comcast did not take a position on data retention laws when asked on Thursday. But Jeanne Russo, a Comcast spokeswoman, said: "Comcast is horrified by any act of violence inflicted upon a child and takes this issue very seriously. Comcast promptly processes and responds to valid legal and law enforcement requests according to law and as described in our applicable privacy policy."

Colorado's legislature is considering an amendment (click here for PDF) to a bill dealing with sex offenders.

The amendment, sponsored by state Sen. Ron Tupa, a Democrat, requires Internet providers to "maintain, for at least 180 days after assignment, a record of the Internet protocol address" assigned to each customer. Violations can be punished by fines of up to $10,000 per incident.

"Preservation" vs. "Retention"
At the moment, Internet service providers typically discard any log file that's no longer required for business reasons such as network monitoring, fraud prevention or billing disputes. Companies do, however, alter that general rule when contacted by police performing an investigation--a practice called data preservation.

A 1996 federal law called the Electronic Communication Transactional Records Act regulates data preservation. It requires Internet providers to retain any "record" in their possession for 90 days "upon the request of a governmental entity."

In addition, Internet providers are required by another federal law to report child pornography sightings to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which is in turn charged with forwarding that report to the appropriate police agency.

That pair of laws--coupled with Internet providers' willingness to cooperate when a child is being harmed--has created a system that works today, says Kate Dean, director of the U.S. Internet Service Provider Association.

"Law enforcement has not demonstrated that the absence of mandatory data retention is detrimental to the public interest," said Dean, whose board members include representatives of AOL, Verizon, BellSouth and EarthLink.

Dean said she's not sure whether U.S. data retention proposals being discussed are likely to mandate mere address recording or also require the storage of the contents of e-mail messages and Web pages visited. A representative of one large Internet provider who did not want to be quoted expressed concern that content could be swept up into legislation--and cited the privacy and security risks of having such a massive data warehouse available.

Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, who's the senior Democrat on the House oversight and investigations subcommittee, expressed skepticism about forcible data retention requirements in an interview on Thursday. He said he would not "be in a rush to support" data retention requirements and would rather see the private sector come up with a better solution.

"I'm against this child porn stuff, but at the same time, let's not further erode the rights of the American people," Stupak said. "That's what I'll be looking for. I'll be looking at (proposed laws) with a very close, constitutional eye as to the validity of the proposals... and I'd like to hear from private industry what they can do."

The European precedent
One question is how closely U.S. proposals will follow those that Europe already has adopted. In December, the European Parliament approved a U.K.-backed requirement saying that communications providers in its 25 member countries--several of which had enacted their own data retention laws already--must retain customer data for a minimum of six months and a maximum of two years.

The Europe-wide requirement applies to a wide variety of "traffic" and "location" data, including the identities of the customers' correspondents; the date, time, and duration of phone calls, voice over Internet Protocol calls, or e-mail messages; and the location of the device used for the communications. But the "content" of the communications is not supposed to be retained. The rules are expected to take effect in 2008.

According to a memo accompanying the proposed rules (click here for PDF), European politicians approved the rules because not all operators of Internet and communications services were storing information about citizens' activities to the extent necessary for law enforcement and national security.

"These developments are making it much harder for public authorities to fulfill their duties in preventing and combating organised crime and terrorism, and easier for criminals to communicate with each other without the fear that their communications data can be used by law enforcement authorities to thwart them," the memo said.

Some U.S. companies are so alarmed by this requirement that they've talked about scaling back their operations in Ireland, which boasts some of the region's most aggressive data retention laws. Joe Macri, managing director of Microsoft Ireland, told the Irish Times last month: "Irish legislation is going beyond what is required from an EU perspective and is going to put significant additional costs on businesses...While we respect and understand the needs and concerns of the law enforcement agencies, there is also a need to take personal privacy concerns and the broader needs of business into consideration."

Jim Harper, director of information policy studies at the free-market Cato Institute, was the member of the Homeland Security's Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee who asked Chertoff about data retention last month.

In an interview this week, Harper warned that mandatory data retention may cause more harm than good. "The true criminals will go and use random Wi-Fi nodes where you can get anonymous access," he said. "You haven't done anything but increase surveillance of law-abiding citizens."

CNET News.com's Anne Broache contributed to this report.

Previous page
Page 1 | 2

See more CNET content tagged:
crime, Internet provider, investigation, police, Internet Service Provider


Join the conversation!
Add your comment
the internet war
if keeping track of info is vital and more is held, prepare for what users may not want to hear---WAR! the internet thus far hasn't truly been overrun to the point where chaos is reigning supreme. yes, watchdogs keep a(n) eye on hackers but if monitoring turns to storage for a set period of time, prepare for a realistic war akin to the likes of orwellian ideology. the internet is a powerful tool and now it may become a major foray for users to reatiliate to the point where eventually war the in real world may end and the cyber world would be more constant and ongoing. you think the war in iraq is a long one? wait til the war on the internet really heats up with all kinds of hackers slamming the internet constantly to the point where their noise runs over the average user. good luck congress and you too mr president.......
Posted by arcturusrann (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You need to get a date
Posted by booboo1243 (328 comments )
Link Flag

What I would like to know is why they can't simply edit the content and not let pornography on the internet, at all? Google did it for China. Why can't they do it everywhere? The government acts as if child pornography is the only crime against humanity being sold on the internet. Google has over 3 million websites of beastiality, which in the main was obtained by porno pimps drugging and raping unknowing victims who are then sold, without consent, on the internet. How criminal is that?
The rape drug, Rohypnol, anaesthetizes the frontal lobe of the brain and leaves the rest of the brain functioning. The victim has no ability to understand what is being done to them. The victim has NO memory of what has been done to them. They are reduced to a state of infancy. When combined with other drugs these poor people (oh,yes, they use men too) they produce a walking, talking, sex machine. This is so serious the DEA in 1996 passed a law that anyone in possession of 1 tablet of Rohypnol (not even having used it) faced 25 years in jail and a $250,000. fine.
The porno pimps have been using this drug for over 50 years!
A great deal of the pornography 'out there' has been acquired this way. What about the rights of all of the victims? What about their privacy, dignity and their inherent copyright on their own image.? How can people allow these attrocities to continue? Drugging, and rapeing people with animals appears to have become socially acceptable. Most of this stuff is being done in North America, just like the child porn. The Internet Servers have no conscience whatsoever, they will sell anything. Even octogenarians in pallative care, dying.

I only know about this stuff because I accidently opened an email back in 1999. I had studied Physiological Psychology in University and did not accept these images at face value. I knew that function of various parts of the brain could be separated chemically. So I knew that these people were victims. When the site openly declares that they ARE indeed RAPE SITES with unknowing victims the servers STILL sell them.
The reason the government doesn't shut them down is that they are making to much money off of it.
I was told that enormous amounts of profit are generated by this so-called industry. The American and the Canadian Governments are fully aware of what is going on and have done nothing to stop it.
The IPS address retainment proposed laws have not even mentioned this issue?
Beastiality, against the law, nearly everywhere, in decent society, has never been addressed by the Supreme Courts, or the police. In fact, the police and the courts, protect these criminals, and deliver intended victims into their hands. In Canada it is nearly impossible for a woman who suspects she may have been a victim to get a drug test. In Canada, if a woman goes to the police, to ask for assistence, she is committed to a Psychiatric Facility, where she is forcibly confined so that the perpetraters have complete access to her. Psychiatric Facilities, Hospitals, group homes, pallative care, are all preferred sites of these assaults. In these places the victims are very vulnerable, usually, already on some form of medication, and easily accessed. In Canada all of these places are ran by the Government, at some level. Still this horrific assault on human beings continues. Is there NO ONE in Government, or the judicial system in North America willing to address this issue?

Posted by emeraldgate (53 comments )
Link Flag
Back in the U.S.S.A.
Officially sanctioned torture, Spitzer-like attacks on business,
secret tribunals and detention camps, endless wars with phony
pretexts, rapacious taxation, a tidal wave of regulations,
psychiatric detention without trial of hundreds of thousands of
non-criminals, drug prohibition, evisceration of property rights
and contract, congressional plundering of politican speech,
warrantless wiretapping and now mandatory data retention.

The form of the American police state is becoming clearer every
Posted by nicmart (1829 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Once upon a time...
I would have thought your posting was paranoid delusion.

I miss those days.
Posted by alflanagan (115 comments )
Link Flag
Oh, how I wish these posts could be edited after posting. I meant
to say "plundering of political speech."
Posted by nicmart (1829 comments )
Link Flag
Well Said. The question is what to do.
Posted by rkneip (7 comments )
Link Flag
Back in the EP
Though I agree with your sentiment, I'm a little more shocked at the European Parliament requiring the level of Big Brother data rentention reported here. That's insane. Just another tool in the hands of politicos and aggressive police/prosecutors to snoop on us all. And we're supposed to trust that these guys have our best interests in mind... ha!
Posted by JoeCrow (83 comments )
Link Flag
It's "for the childred"
Everytime a government wants to raise taxes or grab more power it's "for the childred".

But give them what they want and 99.9% of the time it's used for something else.
Posted by rcrusoe (1305 comments )
Reply Link Flag
"For The Children" Hystaria
Today's "looking for pervs" is yesterdays McCarthyism.
Posted by Too Old For IT (351 comments )
Link Flag
Not Worth It
Sure, theres no doubt that ISP snooping would be a useful law enforcement tool. But the benefit is simply not worth the cost. Random in-home inspections by law enforcement would surely aid in the war against drugs, help identify potential hazards for children, and solve many crimes, but should we scrap the constitution for that result? The answer is clear. There must be a balance between effective law enforcement and the erosion of rights and personal freedoms, and it must be well thought out and calculated. We are giving up too much for too little results.
Posted by seanjerome (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Personal freedom
I hate that argument that we must give up "personal freedom" in
order to "protect our national security". That is bogus! The fact
of the matter is is that Bush is quite possibly the biggest
socialist big government liberal we have ever had. He always
has some kind of excuse for growing the government to
sweltering proportions! God I cant wait until this man is out of
office! I voted for the schmuck unfortunately and I wish I never
would have at times. The fact of the matter is... we need to stop
letting the government walk all over the constitution and our
freedoms or it will continue no matter who is in office. We need
a new party in control because the Republicrats are not getting
anything done except bigger government that lines their pockets
with more money. Its time to bring this country back to a state
of "for the people and by the people"!!
Posted by ericblr0716 (83 comments )
Link Flag
It seems to me ...
... that means lots of disk space. Imagine
filling the logs with requests for single-byte
documents, and randomized traffic. I forsee a
script "makenoise.pl" that does nothing but
cause the ISPs logs to fill up -- it could be
done without using much bandwidth.

As an aside, I've got to assume that people
doing "illicit" stuff are going to use some
relatively secure way to do it. Proxies,
anonymizers, even some sort of encryption and
the like.
Posted by Zymurgist (397 comments )
Reply Link Flag
They already are
One word: Freenet.
The people doing illegal stuff and the people who are just plain paranoid already assume this is happening, and are already protected against it. The only thing they're gonna find by doing this is gradma's secret recipie.
Posted by Urza9814 (71 comments )
Link Flag
There comes a time
It seems there comes a time when the relentless pursuit of criminals becomes a crime itself...
Posted by dburr13 (117 comments )
Reply Link Flag
No, there doesn't.

ISPs already have the ability to collect and retain data related to customer activities.

How is introducing legilation to propose a data retention policy a crime?

It isn't. More paranoia. More political FUD.
Posted by William Squire (151 comments )
Link Flag
The USA isn't the World
US legislators may try to pass legislation requiring ISPs to retain records and make them accessable to the authorities but that only applies to the US. A point our friends over there often forget!

All that will happen is that those ISPs who don't agree with such laws will relocate to Europe where America can't touch them!

It is this sort of blinkered thinking that I find so infuriating in American politics. The Internet isn't American and isn't under their control. Thank god. Although I know that technically the US do have the final say and most of the servers are on US soil. That can change however....
Posted by bwallx (9 comments )
Reply Link Flag
ISPs cannot relocate to Europe
Businesses can relocate and websites can relocate, but ISPs cannot. Except perhaps those that want to provide their service via satellite only.

How else would you connect to them? If they ran fiber across the ocean from their data center directly to your house they would still be subject to U.S. laws.

The only solution to this problem is the ballot box.
Posted by rcrusoe (1305 comments )
Link Flag
Is this really n3td3v?????
Your hypocritical finger pointing is what made me think so.

Quote: "But it was the European Parliament's vote in December for a data retention requirement that seems to have attracted broader interest inside the United States."

So why is it an ISP would go to Europe? To be closer to the entity that proposed the idea?
Posted by ScullyB (47 comments )
Link Flag
We should require the United States Postal Service to retain a copy of every letter sent in the US while we're at it. You can never be too careful.
Posted by gmur (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Government = Lazy?
I dont really aggree with the idea of making the ISPs do the extra work. If the government is really that concerned with "keeping our children safe", they need to start a funded program to actively do so. I think the reason so many officials are excited about the idea is because they intend to make the law then push it off on the ISPs to enforce. Which will only lead to more overhead for the ISPs; in-turn only affecting us, the consumer. ISPs will then have every excuse in the world to raise prices, or add fees of their choice. The ecomonic Repercussions of not having government take active interest or assisting the program, will only reverse the trend we have seen towards a cheaper internet. I also believe this sort of regulation paths the way to more and more restrictive internet access......fast forward 10 years, welcome to the outernet, where your ISP decides if your webpage is appropriate to load, yay.
Posted by dankdweiss (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Yes, but its better
I agree... the government... FBI in particular is very lazy. They want mechanisms in place to deliver digital crime data immediately and digitally as soon as they have legal access to it. Very lazy indeed.

BUT... the alternative is to have them collect and hold the data on their own... yes?

So... either your ISP holds your data pursuant to their privacy agreement and releases it to the FBI under court order..

Or... The FBI holds the data and promises with a pinky-swear that they won't look at it or use it without a court order.

Hmmm.... Yeah... I prefer to let private companies handle their customer's data. Any day.
Posted by William Squire (151 comments )
Link Flag
So I'm in a Mall
And I'm wandering around the maze of shops, looking in some windows, going into some shops, sometimes buying, sometimes not... And all the while a wall of mall cams are grinding away putting my activities on tape. If I was in London it'd be even worse. There they record you on the streets.

While we're being all self-righteous and hysterical about ISP monitoring, can we work up some hyper mall phobia too? And then there's bank hysteria, credit card hysteria, pay stub hysteria, and ATM and cell phone hysteria as well.

At some point, any of you will come to realize that "privacy" is a myth. It ended the day you got your birth certificate. All of the information anyone wants to know about you is already out there, and increasing minute by minute.
Posted by hardedge (98 comments )
Reply Link Flag
There's a difference.
It's one thing to watch you while you're in a bank taking out a loan. That kind of surveillence lowers prices because the buildings are more secure. ISP monitoring raises prices because they have to work to monitor. Also, the mall cams are put there by the mall, not the government. If a specific website wants to monitor their users, no problem. Hell, my webhost does that automatically. But when someone starts monitoring EVERYTHING you say and do, it's different. As for the cameras out there in public areas in London, ever heard of Quintessenz?
Posted by Urza9814 (71 comments )
Link Flag
Hey look its another Nazi invasion....WOW
You know, it would take a republican from Kentucky to support such an invasive concept as this. YEEE HARR! up yours bumpkin boy! Glad I'm not his kid. I personally am getting postal fed up with the expidited pace in which our freedoms as americans and as human beings are being stripped from us behind our backs one by one with every crack paranoid notion and piece of paper that is filed with the government upon zero notification to the public.

In addition it is sickening and unacceptable as an American to sit back and watch every element of our constitution be basterdized, contorted, switched around and turned inside out to serve the ends of the disgusting filthy greedy Nazi pigs in this country who want all the spoils of this land for them selves. They can have it but it will be served up along with there heads I assure you.

The constitution of the United States clearly defines our freedom of speech and our freedom of press. It says nothing of the media by which it is delivered but only that the root product of what we say and what we write is free. Free from persecution, free from prosecution. A man or woman can not be hanged in our nation for what comes out of his or her mouth period. That is a constitutional law set down by the founding fathers of our nation who gave thier lives to put it there.

What if someone were to petition the supreme courts to remove that language from our constitution? This nation of people would bare arms in a heart beat and we would find ourselves in a full scale revolution agreed?

Why then does it go silently unnoticed as scores of tiranical intelligent deamons petition the same institutions to add language in! The constitution mentions no conditions under which its core values are enforced. Only that they are enforced. It says nothing of witch hunts, terrorism or technology because those things are the very elements of our human nature that the consitution was designed to protect us from!!!!
To begin with... you idiots.

in addition it would be even more unconstitutional to engage in any type of monitoring or recording of electronic communication with out having it clearly posted that the activity was taking place. How would you like to see a pop up window in front of every web page you visit that said.


Is that America? I ask you is it?

I love this country and we need to pay attention to what goes on with it so we can preserve it for our kids. We need to remeber our boys who are sacrificing there lives so that we can live under the protection of our constitution and the freedom it provides us.

And we need to resist any one who will seek to comprimise it.

Just one mans opinion
Posted by rkneip (7 comments )
Reply Link Flag
"What if someone were to petition the supreme courts to remove that language from our constitution? This nation of people would bare arms in a heart beat and we would find ourselves in a full scale revolution agreed?"

Not so sure; this is happening on a daily basis as of late, yet a majority of the sheep in this counrty are oblivious to the fact that thier rights are slowly being usurped and continue to blindly follow the wolf in shephard's clothing.
Have King George's efforts to defeat the "terrorists" actually succeeded in accomplishing the badguy's intended agenda?
Posted by proximityguy (10 comments )
Link Flag
Study History and Try Again
The idea of having ISPs record network activity in no way deprives you of any constitutional rights. ISPs have been able to record your activity all along.

If you think this is somehow similar to Nazi tactics during WWII, you REALLY need to go back and study history. Nazi references are clearly ignorant, as there is no reasonable parallel to draw.

The only legitimate complaint comes from ISPs who should be free to set their own data retention policy.

End user rights are not being violated so long as a court order is still required for law enforcement to gain access to the records.
Posted by William Squire (151 comments )
Link Flag
All Politicians are Despots
Of course the idea of someone else doing al lthe work so they can rule absolutely over everyone has appeal. They all want to turn the US into a strong-arm dictatorship, with them in charge (of course).
Posted by Too Old For IT (351 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Bush = at war with anyone who don't think as he does.
Government just wants to rule and regulate every aspect of our lives. They have an excuse now. It's called 9/11. I wouldn't be surprised if they knew about that act of terror before it happened. What makes me think that is the way the President sat there in that classroom for 7 minutes before leaving, and the smirk he had on his face at ground zero.
Posted by casper2004 (267 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You are so right, and the smirk is still there even though our men are dying over there in a war that he started because his father had been threatened at one time. Shame..Bush1
Posted by (1 comment )
Link Flag
they knew
Maybe the fact that in the first week of Aug. 2001 Bush received briefing that attack from Arab terrorists was "imminent" , possibly with airplanes slamming into a tall building may also help convince you that they knew something was gonna happen. I give Bush and his regime credit for one thing. They are opprotunists. And they took full advantage of 9/11
Posted by brifo823 (6 comments )
Link Flag
Huh? They want copies of of WebCam Streams saved indefinately?
I don't really understand this quote from the article:

"Individuals will activate their Webcam when they're abusing a child and they'll record the sexual assault live, and it may be 45 days before law enforcement finally gets notified," Waters said. "We reach out to service providers and they say they don't maintain those records".

The quote just seems extremely ignorant. I'm not surprised that ISP's say, "we don't maintain those records". It's isn't a matter of cooperation. It's a matter of, "It's technical feasibility!"

To explain my confusion, let me pose some questions: How would an ISP either capture or store every webcam stream of every user? If someone is recording live child molestation, would they be streaming it or recording it to their hard drive? Is it even Technically feasible in terms of processing power and storage(practicality aside) to monitor, snoop, intercept, and record webcam streams?

I assume the packets from a webstream are meant to be disposable. If you start recording broadband transmissions to disk, I'm pretty sure that would add up fairly quickly. Say, thousands of hours of a 300k stream? (EEKS! It's worse than a UseNet Feed!)

For one very slim possibility of assisting law enforcement, I'd assume that an ISP would waste terabytes logging thousands of hours of pimply teenagers talking with their girlfriends across a city...

They might as well lobby Microsoft to rewrite the OS to cache everything deleted on a hard drive for as long as possible before recycling it. That would probably be a bigger boon to law enforcement.

I'm not sure that there's any intelligence to a request like this. Technically, I can see email, login dates, and such... but wanting copies of a web cam recording?

Posted by Andrew_in_Iowa (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
If you use Internet Explorer ...
Every website you have ever visited is stored in a file which you can only remove via the command line.
Posted by (22 comments )
Link Flag
You keep voting for Liberal morons (be them Republican or
Democrat) and you keep wondering why your Rights are eroding.

Wake up and vote for others who aren't into Big Money. Get
some new blood into all local, state, and Federal positions.

And for those who don't vote at all, or miss votes . . .


You lost your Right to voice anything about anything by not
being part of the System.
Posted by fakespam (239 comments )
Reply Link Flag
That's BS

I CAN'T vote. I'm not old enough. So I can't complain? That's bull. I'm part of the system. I'm FORCED into the system. I should have as much right as anyone else here to complain about it! I mean, yea, if you can vote and choose not to, then it's your own damn fault...but what about those of us that just can't vote?

Of course, considering no government agency ever reads any complaints you send them (everything from the school's tech guy to senators), it's really no use complaining either way.
Posted by Urza9814 (71 comments )
Link Flag
Here that sound........
It's the sound of yet another domino falling on our rights. We should be outraged over this. If someone proposed a similar requirement in the real world about what did and where we went no one would support it. It's time to chean house
Posted by smokescreen2006 (8 comments )
Reply Link Flag
EXACTLY what right have you lost?

ISPs have been legally allowed to retain activity logs ever since you signed up for service.

Nothing new. No rights lost.

Paranoia and anti-government sentiment is frothing again...
Posted by William Squire (151 comments )
Link Flag
There's a Monster on the loose
I think it's high time that congressional, senatorial and members
of the judiciary and executive branches of government waker up
to the history and seemingly now lost tradition of rights and

I'd like to suggest that these people go back and listen to a
trology by Steppenwolf called "Monster- Suicide- America".
Listen carefully to the lyrics....

The spirit was freedom and justice
And it's keepers seem generous and kind
It's leaders were supposed to serve the country
But now they won't pay it no mind
'Cause the people grew fat and got lazy
And now their vote is a meaningless joke
They babble about law and order
But it's all just an echo of what they've been told
Yeah, there's a monster on the loose
It's got our heads into a noose
And it just sits there watchin'

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.lyrics007.com/Steppenwolf%20Lyrics/Monster%" target="_newWindow">http://www.lyrics007.com/Steppenwolf%20Lyrics/Monster%</a>
Posted by medelegant (16 comments )
Link Flag
ISP Snooping
I believe that if the politicians want to monitor ISP's and web surfing habits of Americans, they should wear GPS collars so that we can keep tabs on them and keep them honest. There is nothing worse than a lying, backstabbing, and hypocritical politician.

I bet none of these idiots would support this.
Posted by Superincognito (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
re: ISP Snooping
You said: "There is nothing worse than a lying, backstabbing, and hypocritical politician."

Can you try to narrow it down a little? ;)
Posted by J_Satch (571 comments )
Link Flag
Perhaps You are Right
But you see this is just what I am saying. The majority of posters here seem to disagree as I do with this practice. I see it as a violation of basic rights. You however seem to think its ok to violate a persons rights as long as you have a court order to do it. Is this not contradictory? Is this not the basterdisation of our constitution I spoke of? I apreciate your feed back freedom of speech is nice isn't it?
However I think that your effort to discredit my opinion has only furthered it potential validity.

In fact if you study your history you will find that the Nazis and the German people in general were impecable record keepers and hunter gatherers information and data and still are to this day. So much so that it played a key roll in thier eventual demise when braught to Justice. They were not ignorant at all they were just evil. And thats what men become when there is nothing to stop them from doing what ever they want Evil. That is my point. Were does the depleation of our liberties stop. When. And who is stopping it. Today its our conversations being recorded tommorrow its our movements then its where we can go and when and soon its a concentration camp all over again. Not on my watch.
Posted by rkneip (7 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Motion seconded
Vote..if you're not registered do it now.
Support strong canidates, both with time and money
Read the news...just not what's being spoon fed by the networks

Tell a friend to do the same
Posted by smokescreen2006 (8 comments )
Link Flag
...a better parallel could be made for the KGB. The Nazis did keep meticulous records but those records were typically of their activities. The KGB, on the other hand, maintained huge stores of in depth records pertaining to the actual people of the USSR.
Posted by J_Satch (571 comments )
Link Flag
Evil must be funded. The money or wants/demands must be
extorted from somewhere.

Get to the root of the current problem by seeing the demise of
the last problem.

The current problem, the big huge picture, is that the American
Voter loves porno, beer, NFL and blames everybody else for his
own destiny. This entitlement mentality has taken over.

Okay, to be entitled, play by their rules to get the money. There
go the Rights.

Or go soverign, and get out of the system. Your choice.
Posted by fakespam (239 comments )
Link Flag
i wouldn't sweat it...
...you couldn't ask for a less talented outfit than our national govt to surveil your internet comms.

besides, it's more fascist garbage from the little emperor's admin which has frankly become a bore. you can rest assured the ISP's (and they do have a VERY powerful lobby) will balk at this idiocy - it's not good for business, quite simply.

the american taxpayer will be better served by throwing a chunk of our tax revs to delivering all americans highspeed broadband access for rates 1/4 those of today - subsidized broadband. it's well overdue we begin to compete more effectively with lesser developed nations who are far ahead of our curve on broadband. just my view about what may well make part of the dem platform in 08.
Posted by i_made_this (302 comments )
Reply Link Flag
If The Data Is Secured As Well As Credit Card Info...
If the ISPs secure this Internet retention data as well as credit card company and merchants secure our financial data we are all in a heap o' trouble. These datawarehouses will quickly be hacked into, or sold off to the highest bidder. You think political campaigns are dirty now, wait till candidates get hold of opponents surfing records. Wait until Fortune 500 CEOs are blackmailed for their surfing habits. You think pornography is only watched by homeless people in the Tenderloin? You think only pervs shop at Good Vibrations?

If Congress had half a wit, which they don't, they would see that the potential for abuses of this proposed data collection is going to impact them as well as everyone else. Their online trips to XXX rated sites, their chat sessions at Gay websites, their online gambling sessions, their orders for Viagra without prescription, are all going to be fair game for opponents. It will make Nixon's dirty tricks department look like a candy store. And who will be held liable if there are data security breeches -- the ISPs? I don't think so. I am sure they will be granted immunity from any prosecution if breeches do occur, because this was a Federal mandate. So then go and try to sue the Feds, good luck on that!
Posted by maxwis (141 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Benjamin Franklin said....
This is paraphrased, but Benjamin Franklin said that any country willing to sacrifice a little freedom in order to gain a little security deserved neither and would lose both.

If this bill passes, I assure you that anyone who voted for it or was involved in any way with passing it will never recieve another vote from me. We should be working to enhance our freedoms in the electronic age, not erode them further. We've already lost so much...

What we should do is put cameras on all our politicians and law enforcement officers 24/7. All their emails, phone calls, etc. should be recorded and a matter of public record. No more big money bribes, no more abuse of power by police. (Yes, yes, I know they're not all bad apples but in those positions of power it doesn't take many bad apples to ruin the whole bunch. And, yes, I realize some of it would have to be classified.)

There has to be a way to protect our children without giving up our freedoms. Let's start by putting criminals who hurt children away for life. No chance of release. If you prey on the weak (children, elderly, etc.) you don't deserve to participate in our society.
Posted by drfrost (467 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Your Vote
Don't worry about your vote counting or not, plenty of dead people
and illegal aliens will vote multiple times on your behalf, to ensure
that the candidate you hate gets in.
Posted by fakespam (239 comments )
Link Flag
Yeah sure and who pays for this?
And it won't help a damned for child pornography, or most of the
other crimes cited in this article. I work at a web host+ISP, and
unless the US government is going to pay our MASSIVE expense for
retaining (illegaly) that much data then they can get lost. They
don't even require such broad retention of phone records!!!! Thats
what this amounts to! Keeping a log of all faxes and phone
Posted by (14 comments )
Reply Link Flag
If the government provides the broadband, then they will have absolutely no problem with 'data retention.' What a great idea, if and only if, you support the data retention policy in the first place.
Posted by nhandler (79 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Another Abuse of Power
Ahhh... yet another example of our government using "FEAR" to erode the rights of average American Citizens right under their nose. The scary part is people actually fall for this bs. Don't call it illegal wiretapping, call it a terrorist surveillance program.
Posted by blaahhh (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
True, But
If the Government wants them to warehouse the data, then they all need to turn in big fat bills to the Government.

If I, as a private citizen, regularly received 1st class mail through the U.S. Postal service, the Government has no record of my correspondence or its content. And I could legally destroy my letters after reading them.

So tell me why the government needs more access to ISP records than it regularly has over the postal correspondence. There are already laws in place to force the ISPs to hold records for those under investigation, just as Postal Inspectors regularly do if supplied a valid subpoena. One again, the government is eroding your freedom of speech and association.
Posted by PzkwVIb (462 comments )
Reply Link Flag

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot



RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.