Tomorrow, FBI able to monitor all internet users

Hello everyone.
I stumbled upon this being posted on liveleak, and I'd like to know if anyone could verify the validity of what's being said.

LINK: www.liveleak.com...

Today is the official deadline for compliance with the FCC's new interpretation of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act(CALEA).

Cable modem companies, DSL providers, broadband over powerline, satellite internet companies and even some universities all have until the end of today to ensure "...the ability of law enforcement agencies to conduct electronic surveillance by requi More..ring that telecommunications carriers and manufacturers of telecommunications equipment modify and design their equipment, facilities, and services to ensure that they have the necessary surveillance capabilities."

The Justice Department began lobbying the FCC in 2002 to reinterpret the law as applying to the internet as well and last June a divided federal appeals court upheld the expansion 2-1.

Basically, this means that starting today the FBI will have the ability to wiretap your internet connection, and means that "Common carriers, facilities-based broadband Internet access providers, and providers of interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service..." must all now have incorporated into their networks the ability for law enforcement agencies to snoop on those for which they have a court ordered warrant.

It's been pointed out however, that even though it may not necessarily be easier to get a warrant and eavesdrop on somebody, the temptation to do so and avoid real gumshoe detective work will be high. Instead of having to really investigate what a person is up to, they may choose to just try and take a look at what they're doing instead.


Also, what will eventually happen I think is that the RIAA and the MPAA will try to petition courts to snoop on suspected file-sharers and gather intelligence and incriminating information with which to build a case against them.

I mean look how they were able to get so many congressman on board with the whole crackdown on colleges and universities, invoking phrases like "file-trafficking" and warning against job layoffs and unemployment due to losses from piracy. I mean if a law is being broken who's to say which ones they will or will not enforce? I think its only a matter of time.

No longer will ISPs be able to claim that it just doesn't have the means to assist copyright holders in determining who has been uploading content illegally, for now they will be able to monitor an IP address and all the traffic that it's responsible for on the network.

It also means that the govt will now have the ability to monitor for other illegal activity, like buying prescription drugs from Canada, browsing and purchasing drug paraphanalia like bongs, pipes, etc., or perhaps even forums or chatrooms of leftist or other radical organizations.

After today the internet will forever be under the watchful eye of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and you can rest assured that corporations and other private entities will do in everything in their power to use this resource for their own ends.

If this is indeed true... it is quite unsettling.
Of course, one could argue that we've all been monitored since the creation of the internet.
But, that's a different story...

Thoughts?

Also, my apologies if this has already been posted. I was unsure which section to post this in, as well.

Originally posted by bvproductions



If this is indeed true... it is quite unsettling.
Of course, one could argue that we've all been monitored since the creation of the internet.
But, that's a different story...

Thoughts?

What's unsettling? That they can snoop on you if they have a court ordered warrant, or that they can monitor for illegal activity?

Really, just what are you people doing on the internet?

This is only announcing the time frame rquirement, it does not mean that after tomorrow, they will have this abilty to monitor.

In other words, most of the ISP providers have had this ability since the introduction of broadband service.

How old is broadband service and how long has it been in place?

That means they have had the ability to monitor since then.

And if it helps prevent crime and hackers from messing up the enjoyment of what the internet is supposed to be and keep all them from stealing people's identities and account info, and tracks down child molesters and all the other sickos out there, I am all for it!!




Cheers!!!!

It's a legitimate law and the Org is a division of the CIA.

Here are some answers for yah from their website:

CALEA website: HERE

Frequently Misunderstood Questions On March 17, 2004, we published a press release regarding our joint petition.

Q: Does the petition for CALEA rulemaking propose to apply CALEA to all types of online communication, including instant messaging and visits to websites?

A: No. The petition proposes CALEA coverage of only broadband Internet access service and broadband telephony service. Other Internet-based services, including those classified as "information services" such as email and visits to websites, would not be covered.

Q: Does the petition propose extensive retooling of existing broadband networks that could impose significant costs?

A: No. The petition contends that CALEA should apply to certain broadband services but does not address the issue of what technical capabilities those broadband providers should deliver to law enforcement. CALEA already permits those service providers to fashion their own technical standards as they see fit.
If law enforcement considers an industry technical standard deficient, it can seek to change the standard only by filing a special "deficiency" petition before the Commission. It is the FCC, not law enforcement, that decides whether any capabilities should be added to the standard. The FCC may refuse to order a change in a standard on many different grounds. For example, a capability may be rejected because it is too costly. Therefore CALEA already contains protections for industry against paying undue compliance costs.

Q: Did law enforcement ask the FCC to curtail its usual review process to implement the petition?

A: No. Law enforcement asked the FCC to give the proposed rulemaking expedited treatment. Such treatment is often requested and granted when urgent matters are brought to the FCC's attention. Some FCC rulemaking proceedings can take years to complete. Law enforcement believes expedited treatment is warranted in this case based on evidence that terrorists, criminals, and/or spies are already exploiting the networks of broadband communication providers to evade lawful electronic surveillance.

Q: Is Law enforcement trying to dictate how the Internet should be engineered to permit whatever level of surveillance law enforcement deems necessary?

A: No. Law enforcement does not seek the power to dictate how the Internet should be engineered or even to decide how broadband communications networks should be engineered. As explained above, CALEA already allocates those decisions to industry and any resulting capability disputes between industry and law enforcement are decided by the FCC.
Moreover, the level of surveillance is not an issue raised in the petition, is not within the scope of CALEA, and is not decided by law enforcement. Based on a statute known as "Title III," before a law enforcement agent or officer is permitted to engage in lawful electronic surveillance, he or she must seek an appropriate court order from a judge or magistrate.
Only if a judicial order is issued can the lawful surveillance take place, and the level of surveillance is prescribed by the order.

Q: Does the petition ignore the letter or spirit of CALEA's "information services" exemption by seeking to apply CALEA to such services?

A: No. The petition notes that CALEA contains a definition of "telecommunications carrier" that is different from and broader than the definition of that term in the Communications Act, which governs most FCC actions. The petition therefore asks the FCC to decide the scope of CALEA coverage based on the CALEA definition, not the Communications Act definition.
As a result, some carriers classified as "information service" providers for purposes of the Communications Act would be simultaneously deemed "telecommunications carriers" for purposes of CALEA.

Q: Would the petition force carriers to decode data that might be encrypted?

A: No. The petition does not raise the issue of encryption. That issue is already addressed by CALEA. The statute states that if encryption is provided by a telecommunications carrier and the carrier possesses the information necessary to decrypt the communication, it must decrypt the communications subject to an order for lawful interception.
But if the encryption is provided by a subscriber or customer, the carrier is not responsible for decrypting the targeted communications.

These are the internet services that are subject to the CALEA Laws/Bilaws and legislation:

Service Type
Technology Voice
Wireline / Wireless: ANSI J-STD-025-A-2003 ANSI J-STD-025-B-2006
Wireline VOIP: (LAES) for Voice over Packet Technologies in Wireline Telecommunication Networks
PTSC ATIS-1000678 (T1.678v2) Cable VOIP Release 1.1: PacketCable Electronic Surveillance Specification
PKT-SP-ESP-I03-40113 Cable VOIP Release 1.5: PacketCable Electronic Surveillance Specification
PKT-SP-ESP1.5-I02-070412 Cable VOIP Release 2.0: PacketCable Electronic Surveillance Delivery Function Collection Function Interface Specification PKT-SP-ES-DCI-I01
PacketCable Electronic Surveillance Intra-Network Specification PKT-SP-ES-INF-I02 Voice over Packet: Electronic Surveillance Needs for Carrier Grade Voice over Packet Service
CGVoP CDMA2000 VOIP: LAES for CDMA2000 VoIP TIA-1066 UMTS VOIP: Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions Technical Requirements for Lawfully Authorized Electronic Surveillance (LAES) for 3GPP IMS-based VoIP and other
Multimedia Services ATIS-0700005-2007 Push-To-Talk UMTS / GPRS: WTSC T1.724 Rel. 5 - UMTS ESMR: EWA Digital Dispatch Surveillance Standard #1 Version 3.0 CDMA2000 POC: TIA-1072

Paging

PAGING: Paging, Advanced Messaging, CALEA - Ver. 1.3 Data Access UMTS / GPRS: WTSC T1.724 Rel. 5 - UMTS CDMA 2000: ANSI J-STD-025-B, plus Addendum 1 Wireline: Lawfully Authorized Electronic Surveillance (LAES) for Internet Access and Services ATIS-1000013.2007 Cable Broadband: Data-over-Cable Service Interface Specifications: Cable Broadband Intercept Specification CM-SP-CBI2.0- I01-070611 Technology Abbreviations Key

Sorry i was too lazy to put in proper breaks check it out here and there are a ton of links on the site to get more information.

CALEA Standards

This should be of no surprise to anyone really. So much information is passing over the internet these days that the Gov(s) are feeling a bit "out of the loop" clearly.

The implications for this and the legal precedence it creates will be very interesting. Looking forward to the firt law suit filed under the law to see how they will use it and fight it. Sadly the best way to learn about it is to see it in action and learn work arounds for it legally or otherwise.

Every law has it's loophole and suits and charges filed under this act may be hard to defend due to the other laws regarding terrorism in the US and UK and Australia primarily.

Canada still has neutrality for the time being and very unspecific laws regarding internet privacy or information collection by law enforcement and or Canada's DOS.

Hate to be the bearer of bad news but they have had this capacity for a LONG time now and they dont need a warrent anymore..homeland security & patriot act made sure they dont. My brother works in the it feild and does intense security on certain companies servers. He has seen the gov more than once. They just walk in ask where such and auch is and go to town no warrents needed.

Originally posted by xoxo stacie
They just walk in ask where such and auch is and go to town no warrents needed.

THAT is what I find unsettling...

Sure, I believe this has been going on for awhile...
But, with laws making it "OK" to monitor whatever they want...that scares me a little.

And as far as the "what are you people doing online?" question goes:
I think of it the same way I think about surveillance cameras being everywhere.
It doesn't bother me because I'm doing something wrong...it bothers me that the government and friends are able to see, hear, and monitor whatever they want.

Creeps me out...

Well there is an easy answer to avoid fears of being monitored via the internet.

Simply disconnect and go without it. That will guarantee that you wont be monitored.

But remember, they got IR, they got UV, they got the ability to monitor you right now through other devices at any time. Even getting rid of the cell phone or i-gadget, they can still bounce a IR laser beam off your window and pick up the sounds in the room, or use thermal IR to see through your walls and roof and get a very good sharp image of everything, all without even lifting a finger except to re-direct the satellite to point at where you are at.




Cheers!!!!


[edit on 20-12-2008 by RFBurns]

reply to post by logician magician


What is scary is the air of thought police in America. To think you can come under scrutiny for "searching" certain keywords. This may be the America you are comfortable living in, but it terrifies plucky.

reply to post by justgeneric


CALEA/SMELLA. This is dangerous territory. There should be laws restricting such things, not advancing. They already can monitor anything they want because Bush says people "don't understand the threats we face".

This, on the books, is not good. It is going down a path we will never be able to return from. Personal sovereignty soon will be moot.

Originally posted by RFBurns
Well there is an easy answer to avoid fears of being monitored via the internet.

Simply disconnect and go without it. That will guarantee that you wont be monitored.


[edit on 20-12-2008 by RFBurns]

I suppose I should stop google searching for ways to dominate the world, eh?

I'd love to disconnect the internet and live without it.
Unfortunately, my job involves a lot of online work...and a lot of online work that revolves around freedom, truth, and knowledge.
When researching such topics, I'm bound to stumble upon some things that someone might not like...

Originally posted by bvproductions

Originally posted by xoxo stacie
They just walk in ask where such and auch is and go to town no warrents needed.

THAT is what I find unsettling...

Sure, I believe this has been going on for awhile...
But, with laws making it "OK" to monitor whatever they want...that scares me a little.

And as far as the "what are you people doing online?" question goes:
I think of it the same way I think about surveillance cameras being everywhere.
It doesn't bother me because I'm doing something wrong...it bothers me that the government and friends are able to see, hear, and monitor whatever they want.

Creeps me out...

Yes, it has been going on for awhile, it was the main point of the
FISA investiagtion into room 641a.

Room 641a - high speed fiber intercept room

This is why bush and all the Telco's wanted immunity.

They originally meant for it to just capture info from ppl on the watch
lists, but we all can guess what happened right ???

You got it, one of the techs realized they were scanning it all for
trigger words, trigger msgs, etc etc.

It wasn't just scanning international communications either,
but anything that hit the fiber and per the tech there are
more of these rooms all over the US.

They "knew" they broke the law, lol.

Oh well !

Nothing's unsettling to me.

My question is why is the FBI doing this when the NSA already has the power to warrantlessly tap your emails and phones illegally?

Originally posted by justgeneric

Q: Does the petition for CALEA rulemaking propose to apply CALEA to all types of online communication, including instant messaging and visits to websites?

A: No. The petition proposes CALEA coverage of only broadband Internet access service and broadband telephony service. Other Internet-based services, including those classified as "information services" such as email and visits to websites, would not be covered.communications.

Who needs to have access to the data on websites you visit, if they can just intercept all the data going to said website before it even gets there.

What an OBVIOUS statement.

The other issues (I'd have to dig up). Is that they can actually wiretap you before obtaining a warrant, they just cant use that info to obtain a warrant or act on the info without a warrant. For something like 14 days, or some brief time period. (Emergency provisions under another bill we aren't taking into account with the immediate context).

And if the warrant is then denied, they can file to have it reheard. Which then grants them something like an additional 60 days to continue intercepting your communications should a warrant be obtained.

And with the way society is going, it won't be long until the Sedition ACT is brought back. Just as it has been before.

And suddenly you're being illegally surveiled while discussing opposition against the government. Which will most likely soon be a felony.

It's not about what you do on the internet now. It's about what you will do. That they will make illegal overnight.

1984 MAN! WE HAVE NO NAMES.



[edit on 24-5-2010 by mryanbrown]

Like others have stated, the NSA already has this capability.

How do you think every major crime is being figured out so quickly anymore. Any text message (call records have always been available) or e mail recalled within hours. Tracking every digital footstep made. Do you think the police have gotten smarter OR are they in possession of smarter tools.

It is truly a big brother situation that US citizens better figure out that our freedoms are being taken from us. Many will say "it doesn't affect me" until it does. Then it is far too late.