[iwar] [fc:Congress.weighs.antiterrorist.surveillance.measures]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-09-24 12:19:16

Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Democratic.Leaders.Say.They.Back.a.Government.Takeover.of.Security.at.Airports]"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:To.Reuters,.there.are.no.terrorists.]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Message-Id: <200109241919.MAA06066@big.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 12:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:Congress.weighs.antiterrorist.surveillance.measures]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Congress weighs antiterrorist surveillance measures 
IDG, By Jennifer Jones http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=555851

LAWMAKERS ARE REPORTEDLY reviewing drafts of the Antiterrorism Act of
2001, a legislative package containing measures for increased electronic
surveillance that have triggered resistance from privacy groups and
others. 

The Department of Justice assembled the proposal -- now posted on
several Web sites -- in the wake of the Sept.  11 terrorist attacks. 

"I'm optimistic that we will be able to act quickly to provide law
enforcement with the additional tools that are necessary to fight
terrorism," said Attorney General John Ashcroft in remarks made while
his department was still crafting the legislation. 

Specifics of the package include changes in areas such as seizure of
voice mail messages, interception of "computer trespasser"
communications, along with changes to wiretap laws. 

In his briefings on the legislation, Ashcroft chose to highlight a
measure that would let law enforcement obtain "wiretap authority for an
individual" instead of a phone number. 

"You understand that assigning the authority only to the hardware means
that when a person changes hardware, we lose our capacity to surveil,"
Ashcroft said. 

But also included in the proposed package is a change to existing laws
around a service provider's disclosure of customers' electronic
communications to law enforcement. 

Under the antiterrorism package, the provider would make such
disclosures "if the provider reasonably believes that an emergency
involving immediate danger of death or serious physical injury to any
person requires disclosure of the information without delay," reads the
draft legislation. 

A PDF of the legislation is featured on a privacy-related Web site
www.epic.org, run by the Washington group, the Electronic Privacy
Information Center (EPIC). 

EPIC and others have said that the use of FBI's Carnivore system is
central to the antiterrorism package.  Carnivore is a filtering system
placed in an ISP to monitor traffic. 

In response to the legislation, several civil liberties groups together
with some religious and consumer entities banded together to warn
lawmakers to go slow on the surveillance changes. 

"We need to consider proposals calmly and deliberately with a
determination not to erode the liberties and freedoms that are at the
core of the American way of life," reads a statement offered on behalf
of 150 groups, 300 law professors, and 40 computer scientists. 

Those supporters gathered Thursday in Washington to issue a 10-point
declaration titled "In Defense of Freedom."

Participating groups included the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),
National Lawyers Guild, Net Action, and EPIC. 

While privacy groups reacted strongly, at least some corporations voiced
initial support for stepped up surveillance measures. 

"I think there may be some backlash and concerns from citizens and
companies.  But the need for privacy right now should not be confused
with interference with legitimate law enforcement," said Eytan Urbas,
vice president of marketing for Santa Clara, Calif.-based Mailshell. 

Urbas continued that the "lines of privacy change" and that initial
tolerance for heightened surveillance is akin to "people's increased
willingness to subject themselves to searches in airports now."

But groups including the ACLU have immediately taken a harder line,
saying that the Justice Department and FBI already have broad powers in
that area, specifically that judges seldom refuse wiretap requests. 

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE VeriSign guide to security solutions for your web site: encrypting transactions, securing intranets, and more!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/XrFcOC/m5_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Democratic.Leaders.Say.They.Back.a.Government.Takeover.of.Security.at.Airports]"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:To.Reuters,.there.are.no.terrorists.]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-09-29 21:08:49 PDT