On Tue, 25 May 1993 14:56:48 -0400, andrew m. boardman <uunet!cs.columbia.edu!amb> wrote -
Food for thought: that, at least as of recently, the NSA bought weekly dumps of all usenet articles on tape. I highly doubt they were for their reading pleasure...
Is this hearsay, innuendo or fact? If fact, what can you site as reference to support your statement? If you know this to be fact, please cite your references and provide as much detail as possible. Cheers. Paul Ferguson | The future is now. Network Integrator | History will tell the tale; Centreville, Virginia USA | We must endure and struggle fergp@sytex.com | to shape it. Stop the Wiretap (Clipper/Capstone) Chip.
Is this hearsay, innuendo or fact? If fact, what can you site as reference to support your statement? If you know this to be fact, please cite your references and provide as much detail as possible.
Rick Adams of UUNET confirmed on the com-priv list that his organization had been selling the FBI a usenet feed on tape. I could find the exact reference if you want. I don't know for sure that the NSA has a feed, or from whom, but it wouldn't surprise me. However, the obvious next point is, so what? It's a public system. Any idiot can pay $20/month and get a public access account. If you say something in a news post which you wouldn't want the FBI or NSA or whoever to see, you're the person who has done something stupid. Tapping a news feed isn't like tapping a phone line. It's more like turning on the television. Marc
Is this hearsay, innuendo or fact? If fact, what can you site as reference to support your statement? If you know this to be fact, please cite your references and provide as much detail as possible. This was based on a verbal conversation at Interop with someone from uunet, from whom the tapes are purchased. I or they could be mis[led|informed|remembering], but if you really care, ask uunet. andrew
Is this hearsay, innuendo or fact? If fact, what can you site as reference to support your statement? If you know this to be fact, please cite your references and provide as much detail as possible.
This was based on a verbal conversation at Interop with someone from uunet, from whom the tapes are purchased. I or they could be mis[led|informed|remembering], but if you really care, ask uunet.
andrew
Actually, the most alarming revelation here could be that someone at uunet is going around casually disclosing information about their customers. Most communications companies, especially those that seek to be regarded as "common carriers", make quite clear to their employees that customer data are among their most proprietary and that revealing any of it is grounds for lightning-speed dismissal. (Obviously, they reveal data that they SELL about their customers, and will disclose anything on a court order, but that's not what we're talking about here). -matt (who has signed his share of non-disclosure agreements with big, bad communications companies)
This was based on a verbal conversation at Interop with someone from uunet, from whom the tapes are purchased. I or they could be mis[led|informed|remembering], but if you really care, ask uunet.
Having just spoken to someone who contracts at the NSA (and no, this name I will not post), he does not believe they get such a beast, although, as many people have pointed out, the FBI did. That, then, would be the origin of that, along with some TLA confusion. Actually, the most alarming revelation here could be that someone at uunet is going around casually disclosing information about their customers. A lot of people perceive the government as having neither a right nor a need to privacy. Certainly there are also quite a few who label themselves "privacy advocates" whose standards do a 180 when the privacy involved is that of the likes of Mykotronx... andrew
participants (4)
-
andrew m. boardman -
fergp＠sytex.com -
Marc Horowitz -
Matt Blaze