It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

DOJ Wants to Know Who's Rejecting Your Friend Requests

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   

DOJ Wants to Know Who's Rejecting Your Friend Requests


www.eff.org...

In the latest turn in our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records related to the government’s use of social networking websites, the Department of Justice finally agreed to release almost 100 pages of new records. These include draft search warrants and affidavits for Facebook and MySpace and several PowerPoint presentations and articles on how to use social networking sites for investigations.
(visit the link for the full news article)


edit on 24-1-2012 by mother1138 because: Link got garbled. Sorry.




posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
The EFF article goes on to explain the law enforcement has apparently been seeking search warrants and then retrieving information from Facebook, MtSpace, and etc to find:

"This includes not just your full profile information but also who you “poke” (and presumably who “pokes” you), who rejects your friend requests, which apps you use, what music you listen to, your privacy settings, all photos you upload as well as any photos you’re tagged in (whether or not you upload them), who’s in each of your Facebook groups, and IP logs that can show if and when you viewed a specific profile and from what IP address you did so."

So I guess if your using TOR to access something like FB, they'll gather that if your ip points to various places all over the globe from day to day ... which they would figure must mean you're CLEARLY guilty and hiding something, eh?

The EFF also points out that places like MySpace holds account data at least a year after the account is deleted. (That's kinda' industry standard by now, isn't it?)

Anyhoo, another example of the nosy, busy-body gov't getting off on compiling data in the name of security.

...But security for whom?

EFF.org
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 24-1-2012 by mother1138 because: link got garbled. Sorry.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   
This is nothing new, It requires a subpoena or warrant just like cell phone records. The cops don't just call and have access to everything. It better be pretty damn important for the court to order a subpoena. Subpoena's aren't handed out all willy nilly...lol

I'm sure if your wife or daughter came up missing and you thought someone one Facebook might have had last contact with them, I'm sure you'd be all about it.

With technology advancing at a rapid rate , it would only make sense that the gathering of information for investigations would utilize that technology.
edit on 24-1-2012 by EyesWideShut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:04 AM
link   
It's reasons like this why I don't use FB or any of the other social networking sites. ATS is it for me as far as online interaction with others..... or WoW!



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by webpirate
It's reasons like this why I don't use FB or any of the other social networking sites. ATS is it for me as far as online interaction with others..... or WoW!


Lol, you think ATS is exempt? Not. I'm sure they do it on ATS too.

edit on 25-1-2012 by Manhater because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Manhater
 


Oh...I'm sure they do. At least here one thing they don't have that a lot of other sites do is pics of me or whoever I associate with. Well...they might..but they're just avatars!

Personally I'm surprised I haven't made the no fly list yet..lol. Since my mouth often gets me in trouble. I also have to watch what I say more here too than other sites or one of our good mods will be all over me!

I'd rather have to behave because of a mod than worry about posting something that get's the government even more interested in me!


We may have to sign up with our real names, but those are kept hidden. SO it doesn't really matter who I "poke" or tick off....I prolly don't have a clue in RL who they even are.





edit on 25-1-2012 by webpirate because: additional thoughts



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   
What bothers me the most about that isn't that they're looking up all this information... I already knew they could/were... But that they have a specific interest in the kind of music you listen to. Why is the music a person listening to included in this? What scares me about this is I grew up listening to all kinds of music, including metal and industrial... And I would always hear about how certain music is evil or is going to make me violent. People tried to make me out to be a bad person solely based on some of the music I listened to. Is this what's happening here? You're charged with a crime, and then the police say "Oh no! Look! So-and-so listens to rap music or metal! They're obviously probably the ones who did this!"
I can't see any other reason for musical interests being included than to provide a hugely unfounded psychological profile.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Kind of defeats the purpose of TOR to use it to go to your own Facebook account.

No?



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by mother1138
 


So basically if you have nothing to hide this means nothing.
Basically the government want's to know what everyone else already knows about me. I'm a burn out, I like guns and weapons and alot of music.
edit on 25-1-2012 by LongbottomLeaf because: wertyuiop



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by mother1138
 


well I very well better conduct myself in a law abiding fashion. Then I will not be subject to any further "poke" People FACEBOOK IS NOT PRIVATE...IT IS ALL PUBLIC.
here is a news flash. Conduct your private life like the world is watching ....because it IS.
Nothing is private. Nothing is personal. Its all out there. Ones own actions can hang or promote, is this such a secret?
Or do we get all getto or gangsta and say " nobody gonna mess wit me cause I will git dem good like dey got it comin or sompton...see wat im sayin" "Dont mess wit da bull baby cause you will git da bull baby"

be a good citizen. The reward is great consequences.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by EyesWideShut
This is nothing new, It requires a subpoena or warrant just like cell phone records. The cops don't just call and have access to everything. It better be pretty damn important for the court to order a subpoena. Subpoena's aren't handed out all willy nilly...lol

I'm sure if your wife or daughter came up missing and you thought someone one Facebook might have had last contact with them, I'm sure you'd be all about it.

With technology advancing at a rapid rate , it would only make sense that the gathering of information for investigations would utilize that technology. ]


Sure but I have seen exactly because of that, personal/social networking/warehouses are under real time pressure to provide info without order/subpoena, or accept blanket/bulk court orders/suppoena 'forms' via fax, email, etc it is the internet afterall, everything's virtual if easiest.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by trollz
What bothers me the most about that isn't that they're looking up all this information... I already knew they could/were... But that they have a specific interest in the kind of music you listen to. Why is the music a person listening to included in this? What scares me about this is I grew up listening to all kinds of music, including metal and industrial... And I would always hear about how certain music is evil or is going to make me violent. People tried to make me out to be a bad person solely based on some of the music I listened to. Is this what's happening here? You're charged with a crime, and then the police say "Oh no! Look! So-and-so listens to rap music or metal! They're obviously probably the ones who did this!"
I can't see any other reason for musical interests being included than to provide a hugely unfounded psychological profile.

says who Alex Jones???Live your life and except the consequences, good or bad in accordance to how you live. It really is as easy as maybe no more FaceBook. Heaven forbid you need real pictures that you can put into a chest for keep sake. Heaven forbid you really pick up the phone and call a friend 3000 miles away to say Hi. Heaven forbid you meet a nice person you might like to get to know better during the routine of your life vs. pretense of on line activities.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by EyesWideShut
This is nothing new, It requires a subpoena or warrant just like cell phone records. The cops don't just call and have access to everything. It better be pretty damn important for the court to order a subpoena. Subpoena's aren't handed out all willy nilly...lol
Before the patriot act that may have been true.

secure.wikimedia.org...

Perhaps one of the biggest controversies involved the use of NSLs by the FBI. Because they allow the FBI to search telephone, email, and financial records without a court order, they were criticized by many parties.[217][218][219][220] In November 2005, BusinessWeek reported that the FBI had issued tens of thousands of NSLs and had obtained one million financial, credit, employment, and in some cases, health records from the customers of targeted Las Vegas businesses. Selected businesses included casinos, storage warehouses and car rental agencies. An anonymous Justice official claimed that such requests were permitted under section 505 of the USA PATRIOT Act and despite the volume of requests insisted "We are not inclined to ask courts to endorse fishing expeditions".[221] Before this was revealed, however, the ACLU challenged the constitutionality of NSLs in court. In April 2004, they filed suit against the government on behalf of an unknown Internet Service Provider who had been issued an NSL, for reasons unknown. In ACLU v. DoJ, the ACLU argued that the NSL violated the First and Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution because the USA PATRIOT Act failed to spell out any legal process whereby a telephone or Internet company could try to oppose an NSL subpoena in court. The court agreed, and found that because the recipient of the subpoena could not challenge it in court it was unconstitutional.[123] Congress later tried to remedy this in a reauthorization Act, but because they did not remove the non-disclosure provision a Federal court again found NSLs to be unconstitutional because they prevented courts from engaging in meaningful judicial review.


"the FBI had issued tens of thousands of NSLs and had obtained one million financial, credit, employment, and in some cases, health records from the customers of targeted Las Vegas businesses"?? All without any court order or warrant.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by EyesWideShut
This is nothing new, It requires a subpoena or warrant just like cell phone records. The cops don't just call and have access to everything. It better be pretty damn important for the court to order a subpoena. Subpoena's aren't handed out all willy nilly...lol
Before the patriot act that may have been true.

secure.wikimedia.org...

Perhaps one of the biggest controversies involved the use of NSLs by the FBI. Because they allow the FBI to search telephone, email, and financial records without a court order, they were criticized by many parties.[217][218][219][220] In November 2005, BusinessWeek reported that the FBI had issued tens of thousands of NSLs and had obtained one million financial, credit, employment, and in some cases, health records from the customers of targeted Las Vegas businesses. Selected businesses included casinos, storage warehouses and car rental agencies. An anonymous Justice official claimed that such requests were permitted under section 505 of the USA PATRIOT Act and despite the volume of requests insisted "We are not inclined to ask courts to endorse fishing expeditions".[221] Before this was revealed, however, the ACLU challenged the constitutionality of NSLs in court. In April 2004, they filed suit against the government on behalf of an unknown Internet Service Provider who had been issued an NSL, for reasons unknown. In ACLU v. DoJ, the ACLU argued that the NSL violated the First and Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution because the USA PATRIOT Act failed to spell out any legal process whereby a telephone or Internet company could try to oppose an NSL subpoena in court. The court agreed, and found that because the recipient of the subpoena could not challenge it in court it was unconstitutional.[123] Congress later tried to remedy this in a reauthorization Act, but because they did not remove the non-disclosure provision a Federal court again found NSLs to be unconstitutional because they prevented courts from engaging in meaningful judicial review.


"the FBI had issued tens of thousands of NSLs and had obtained one million financial, credit, employment, and in some cases, health records from the customers of targeted Las Vegas businesses"?? All without any court order or warrant.



NSL's have been around since before I was born, only the Fed's can use them. Once again it's nothing new. it surprises me how people (Not you) think that the intelligence services are JUST now doing this. They have always operated under "The ends justify the means".



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 05:40 AM
link   
There is a section on FB that allows you to delete everything on it if you click on its and stay out of FB for a minimum of 14 days then all your details ketc are wiped clean,,,,,,or so they say.
I did it but have not logged back in to check if it's true.
Anyone else tried this as I don't like my personal info being stored for anyone to see.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by mother1138
So I guess if your using TOR to access something like FB, they'll gather that if your ip points to various places all over the globe from day to day ... which they would figure must mean you're CLEARLY guilty and hiding something, eh?


Nope not at all since the only way they can access the information is by a valid search warrant. Absent probable cause to obtain the search warrant, they wont have access to any of the information listed in the article.

All of the information in the article revolves around the police agency having probable cause to apply for a valid warrant to gain access to the information. Absent that, no one cares who you poke, who pokes you, etc..




top topics



 
3

log in

join