How the government snoops on your web browsing

[VMI77]

http://survivalblog.com/2012/03/importa ... ative.html

It has come to my attention that from August of 2011 to November of 2011, the FBI secretly redirected the web traffic of more than 10% of SurvivalBlog's US visitors through CJIS, their sprawling data center situated on 900 acres, 10 miles from Clarksburg, West Virginia. There, the Feebees surreptitiously collected the IP addresses of my site visitors. In all, 4,906 of 35,494 selected connections ended up going to or through the FBI servers. (Note that this happened several months before we moved our primary server to Sweden.) Furthermore, we discovered that the FBI attached a long-lived cookie that allowed them to track the sites that readers subsequently visited. I suspect that the FBI has done the same to hundreds of other web sites. I find this situation totally abhorrent, and contrary to the letter of 4th Amendment as well as the intent of our Founding Fathers.

[Glenn61]

You are probably correct--using an entire list of reasons/laws under Post 9-11.

[The Annoyed Man]

Interesting. I'm going to follow up on the VPN information.

[MoJoeWrkn]

I read tht as well. Why isn't the ACLU fighting things like this instead of the idiotic cases it takes on. This is exactly the kind of thing they should be fighting.

I really like the survivalblog website and will continue to go there, but I use a VPN so hopefully that will prevent tracking. Although they would be pretty bored if they tracked me :)

[jimlongley]

Why does the physical size of the site have any bearing, data is not very large?

[VMI77]

Interesting. I'm going to follow up on the VPN information.

I've subsequently read that many of those advocating VPN may not fully understand its limitations.

I think this guy provides a good primer on the limits of internet privacy: http://cryptogon.com/?p=624

[sjfcontrol]

That link doesn't seem to work for me, but what do you figure the odd are that this actually happened? Or could it just be the paranoid rantings of a survivalist-blogger?

[RoyGBiv]

I think this guy provides a good primer on the limits of internet privacy: http://cryptogon.com/?p=624

Fantastic linked article... Thanks.

I've considered using PGP for email and a VPN for web access, "Just Because"... but every time I get ready to pull the trigger I remember that the likelihood of these things really being secure is near nil. IMO, using secure measures would make you (me) more of a target of inquiry....

NSA: "This RGB guy is sending PGP emails to these 4 addresses, let's pull up phone logs for all 5 of these people, check their passport records, college records, work history and get their tax returns from the IRS for the past 10 years. Don't forget to check their parents and siblings, just in case."

Privacy is dead. We can tilt at that windmill or just deal with it. The horse has left the barn.
The best solution? Time travel in reverse.... I think I'd like to try 1848. The California Gold Rush looked like fun.

ETA: LOL.! Seems from the next post (below) that even during the telegraph era privacy was an illusion. (laugh or cry, I suppose)

[VMI77]

That link doesn't seem to work for me, but what do you figure the odd are that this actually happened? Or could it just be the paranoid rantings of a survivalist-blogger?

Just tried it, worked for me. Maybe the site was having problems when you tried it. I think it happened. I posted another article from Wired magazine about the switching nodes the NSA has installed at telephone switching centers across the country. There is plenty of information out there in the tech world that supports a conclusion that the government is engaged in widespread and pervasive monitoring of the internet. In fact, an AT&T technician has testified in Federal Court to the existence of these NSA taps on the internet --I think his name is Joe Klein. The DHS has openly stated that they are monitoring social networking and other internet sites. I also think that the Feds contract out monitoring to "private" companies to get around 4th amendment limitations.

Only a small percentage is real-time 24/7 monitoring, based on keywords and social links. However, from what I've read, they're storing everything, and can look back for just about anything. This isn't exactly unprecedented....Western Union used to funnel it's telegraph traffic to the Feds.

The Armed Forces Security Agency (AFSA)[2] and its successor NSA were given direct access to daily microfilm copies of all incoming, outgoing, and transiting telegraphs via the Western Union and its associates RCA and ITT. NSA did the operational interception, and, if information that would be of interest to other intelligence agencies was found, the material was passed to them.[3] "Intercepted messages were disseminated to the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD), and the Department of Defense." No court authorized the operation and there were no warrants

.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_SHAMROCK

[Rex B]

Apparently they don't already have enough bandwidth covered:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/0 ... nter/all/1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Iunnrais]

They need to be able to tell the Secret Service which places in the US to declare 'restricted' areas of national significance

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/ ... p=obinsite

[hi-power]

Here's more good news (edited to add-I guess this is related to the OP, but I'm confused about who is doing the watching): http://apnews.myway.com/article/20120323/D9TLT6VG0.html

"The fact that this data can be retained for five years on U.S. citizens for whom there's no evidence of criminal conduct is very disturbing," Rotenberg said.

[57Coastie]

...Why isn't the ACLU fighting things like this instead of the idiotic cases it takes on. This is exactly the kind of thing they should be fighting....

If I might offer an answer to your question:

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/n ... nfographic" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jim

[Rex B]

I think ACLU is suing the feds over this