reply to post by doctormcauley
Wow, I see the media has gotten to you. All Muslims are not terriosts and all terriosts are not foreign.
D.C. Sniper
Oklahoma City Bombings
Etc.
Can the government track me through ATS?, page 6
privacy
it happsn.)
reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 11:01 PM by Ian McLean
reply to post by Grumble
Bravo, excellent and inspiringly invictive. But also to the point: realize there is a large difference between what can be done, hypothetically, with regards to surveillance and monitoring, and what those who may possess such capabilities might be willing to reveal is actually done, via action.
Little fish don't gotta fear no harpoon. Bigger fish laugh at it anyway.
Bravo, excellent and inspiringly invictive. But also to the point: realize there is a large difference between what can be done, hypothetically, with regards to surveillance and monitoring, and what those who may possess such capabilities might be willing to reveal is actually done, via action.
Little fish don't gotta fear no harpoon. Bigger fish laugh at it anyway.
basicaly yes but they wont take the time to come see what you do/say in here unless u've triggered a particular interest in
them... they use node based sniffers each ISP in america and all the main net routers has a node running that sniff stuff and looks for trigger words
if a trigger word is found the email/post will be copied and analysed if what was said tick them off then they can start actively monitoring ur data
even tho u hash an email/post/file into different files and send it accross multiple networks what they use can reassemble it all Carnivor used to be
able to do it like 15 years ago so i'll let ur imagination at work figure out what Echelon can do today... using anomysers wont really work because
the anomyser is located somewhere on the net and they sniff right at the source at your ISP look below ur gonna understand better reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 11:57 PM by Ian McLean
reply to post by _R4t_
Thanks, I understood all of that except the acronym 'MITM'; what's that mean?
Also, it's wisest to consider that keyword triggered 'sniffers' are a thing of the past, a compromise based on limited relative computation capacity. Why not go whole hog?
For example, you may think 'well I have a 100GB hard drive and no one could track all of that data'. However, how much of the data on your hard drive is unique, when looking at the set of 'all installed machines'? All the system files, common applications, downloads, etc., exist in multiple places, on multiple machines. Why do more than identify 'this user has this common file', when constructing an terminal-state image, relative to the Internet as a whole?
I've run 'duplicate file' calculations on a typical Windows installation, you would be amazed at the amount of reported redundancy in the file system layout....
I estimate that the complete activity log, of the changes a user affects to their system state in a single day, could easily be represented with less than 50KB of data, when correlated to a world-wide database of 'common files', and deltas thereof.
Have a look into government sponsorship of research initiatives into data checksumming and 'digesting' functions, al-la 'MD5'.
Edit to add: Oh! I guessed! MITM = "Man In The Middle" (research some cyptography sploits if this doesn't make sense)
[edit on 10-9-2008 by Ian McLean]
Thanks, I understood all of that except the acronym 'MITM'; what's that mean?
Also, it's wisest to consider that keyword triggered 'sniffers' are a thing of the past, a compromise based on limited relative computation capacity. Why not go whole hog?
For example, you may think 'well I have a 100GB hard drive and no one could track all of that data'. However, how much of the data on your hard drive is unique, when looking at the set of 'all installed machines'? All the system files, common applications, downloads, etc., exist in multiple places, on multiple machines. Why do more than identify 'this user has this common file', when constructing an terminal-state image, relative to the Internet as a whole?
I've run 'duplicate file' calculations on a typical Windows installation, you would be amazed at the amount of reported redundancy in the file system layout....
I estimate that the complete activity log, of the changes a user affects to their system state in a single day, could easily be represented with less than 50KB of data, when correlated to a world-wide database of 'common files', and deltas thereof.
Have a look into government sponsorship of research initiatives into data checksumming and 'digesting' functions, al-la 'MD5'.
Edit to add: Oh! I guessed! MITM = "Man In The Middle" (research some cyptography sploits if this doesn't make sense)
[edit on 10-9-2008 by Ian McLean]
reply posted on 10-9-2008 @ 12:08 AM by Ian McLean
reply to post by schrodingers dog
Ah, well that's the thing -- many topics surface every few months or so on ATS. There's no shame in repeating one's opinion. In fact, say say again, until disproven. Those who would hear, with new ears, our 'conspiratorial rantings' are worthy: not of less consideration, because the topic is old (but new to them), but rather more. For we should have, in our periods between repetition, considered and honed our thoughts and explanations. Lest we fall victim to assumptive rhetoric. Please I ask again: someone prove me wrong!
Ah, well that's the thing -- many topics surface every few months or so on ATS. There's no shame in repeating one's opinion. In fact, say say again, until disproven. Those who would hear, with new ears, our 'conspiratorial rantings' are worthy: not of less consideration, because the topic is old (but new to them), but rather more. For we should have, in our periods between repetition, considered and honed our thoughts and explanations. Lest we fall victim to assumptive rhetoric. Please I ask again: someone prove me wrong!
reply posted on 10-9-2008 @ 12:15 AM by schrodingers dog
reply to post by Ian McLean
Ian, I just want to make sure I understand you correctly.
Are you saying that it is worth it revisiting old thoughts in long extinguished threads to grasp an awareness of how we might have grown since? Because that is a very valid point which I agree with.
Or are you saying that we should do to see if our behavior since has honored the opinions and positions we then proclaimed.
Or might you be saying something that I'm not getting.
[edit on 9/10/2008 by schrodingers dog]
Ian, I just want to make sure I understand you correctly.
Are you saying that it is worth it revisiting old thoughts in long extinguished threads to grasp an awareness of how we might have grown since? Because that is a very valid point which I agree with.
Or are you saying that we should do to see if our behavior since has honored the opinions and positions we then proclaimed.
Or might you be saying something that I'm not getting.
[edit on 9/10/2008 by schrodingers dog]
