OT 9/26/03 Ethics 101

This week after some irritating troubles I eventually got Windows XP Pro installed on a customer's computer. Once installed I downloaded and installed Service Pack 1 and and many Security patches. The entire procedure ate up close to an hour of my time maybe more I wasn't really counting. What occurred to me during all of this were recent events:

1) A young genius who hacked into networks exposing the weakness to the corporation or government agency as soon as he gained access, surrendered to authorities.

2) Microsoft's decision to close all but 3 or 4 chat rooms, presumably to facilitate ease of moderating them, in the name of protecting children from predatory behaviour.

3) e-Bays admition that they freely offer up your personal to Law Enforcement bodies globally without the need of a warrant.

4) RIAA's (un?)ethical practice of identifying people sharing copyrighted material while using an unauthorized version of Kazaa software (KazaaLite).

5) A recent conviction of a local peadophile involved a small division of the R.C.M.P. I.T. division who not only monitored this sick bast**d's internet activities included his chat room conversations but also obtained a small mountain of child pornographic videos, images, and reading material from his computer while doing said monitoring of his chats with supposed children.

I'm sure if I put my mind to it I could come up with even more examples but I think you get the gist. One of the more recent threads here, involving e-Bay, there seemed many people who think this to have been an invasion of privacy and therefore illegal. While not being an American I know that many U.S. legal principals are the same as most nations. With broadband connections automatically connecting many ordinary end users to the internet once booted to Windows thier pesonal data sit behind unlocked doors just waiting for Big Brother to come along and peruse. Most notably in order for a personal right/freedom to privacy to have been violated (s)he must first establish a reasonable expectation to that privacy. My question is how reasonable is your expectation to privacy while being connected to the net?

Well that sounds very legitamate. But honestly if the end user is an idiot enough to the point as to open up his entire hdd to the net he deserves to be in jail for whatever reason... pedophile mp3 hack or buisness secrets...whatever the case stupidity is the bulk of the end users problems!

I suppose my expectation of privacy on the net is a bit dependant on from whom. I know that hackers & crackers can intercept data packets and can read my emails (good luck to them they'll die of boredom :D ). I have much more of an expectation privacy from the authorities of state, not because I have anything to hide, but because I don't want to live in a police state.

If the police suspect me of a crime and want to tap my telephone it has to be authorised either by a judge or the Home Secretary himself in the UK (I'm not sure which). That's fine, because someone is overseeing the police and the appropriate checks and balances are in place. But with the Internet the Western democracies to a greater or lesser degree seem to want some very insidious blanket powers to read peoples emails and to know what web sites they've visited, and I have a real problem with that. Once you remove the oversight and the checks and balances then you're on a very slippery slope indeed.

We've lost far too many hard won rights since 9/11/2001, in the name of "protecting" us from terrorism, even though there was plenty of intelligence before the attack on the WTC which wasn't acted upon. Why do they need a million times as much intelligence that still won't be acted upon (if only because of information overload)?

Nor do I want to live in a Plutocracy either, and I don't like the way the RIAA, MPAA, et al are able to use "campaign funds" to effectively buy their own politicians to write their own laws. Very bad laws at that. And every bad law that the US gets seems to wing it's way to these shores eventually. These are people who are too stupid to keep a website up and running for more than 5 minutes at a time - do we really need them dictating laws regarding the Internet?

Oh yes, one other point; another member said in another thread "live a clean life and abide by the law and you don't have anything to worry about". I'm sure that a lot of law abiding members of the Communist party in the USSR thought that in the 1930's too, right up to the point where they got a kangaroo court and transportation to the Gulag. If we continue to allow the constant erosion of our democratic rights then we too can get to live in interesting times like that. One of our politicians would fit right in in the role of Heinrich Himmler or Lavrenti Beria. I expect you've got a few in your part of the world too. Or a little closer to home, the House Un-American Activities Comittee gave a few clean-living, law abiding citizens a good shafting too.

I think I might have some more to say on this subject, I feel rather strongly about it :p :p

The Washington Times: Congress kills data-mining computer program

Quote:

---

Congress has pulled the plug on a data-mining computer program criticized by privacy advocates as a supersnoop system to spy on American citizens and is closing the Pentagon office that created it.

"The outcome is we are not going to have Americans picked up by their ankles and turned upside down then shaken to see if anything funny falls out," said Sen. Ron Wyden, Oregon Democrat and leading opponent of the office's activities.

"We won't see Americans on American soil being targeted under the biggest surveillance program in the history of the U.S.," Mr. Wyden said.

A House and Senate conference committee late Wednesday agreed on instructions to close the Information Awareness Office (IAO) ...

---

TOMPAINE.com: The Cost Of Ignoring Privacy Rights

Quote:

---

Anyone who believes that the right to privacy is some nice esoteric notion with little real economic impact should take the blinders off. Last year, more than 3 million U.S. consumers were victims of identity thefts made possible by easy access to personal information. The thefts were used to open fraudulent bank, credit card or utility accounts and to commit other crimes.

This shocking finding comes from a report just released by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC.) The FTC estimates the cost of these identity thefts to be $3.8 billion to consumers plus more than $32.9 billion to businesses, many of them small merchants.

In addition to these "identity thefts," the FTC found that 6.6 million became victims of a closely related crime, "account thefts" which involved the use of stolen ATM cards, or financial records to steal from a victim's existing accounts.

These "account thefts" created $14 billion in business losses plus $1.l billion in losses to consumers. The "account thefts" are outstripping the "identity thefts." FTC found a 71 percent increase in this type of theft last year.

In most cases, the thefts were used in purchases by the thieves. But about 15 percent of the thefts were used in other schemes, including the utilization of stolen information to obtain government records. ...

---

Quote:

---

While not being an American I know that many U.S. legal principals are the same as most nations.

---

In regard to privacy, there is a significant difference between US law and the EU:

* The EU strictly limits the use of personal data collected by businesses or other organizations.

* In the US, collected data (assuming no laws were violated to amass the data) "belongs" to the collector. It can be sold, traded, distributed, etc with few if any restrictions.

How ironic. We begin with Ethics and Big Brother XP.... :eek:

How can we begrudge the downhill slide in computing and buy Redmond spyware by the trainload?

I can understand the neophytes not knowing any better and buying a pre-loaded computer in Wal-Mart, (as I once did), but for those of us that now do?

I'll keep running ME until it dies. I'll not leave my chances on my being able to use my OS to one of yesterdays fry cooks.

I shudder to think how many will swarm to Gate's next piece of spyware.

Off my soapbox.... ;)

I believe that no matter wher you are, if the government want to get information on you they will - no matter what means are used.

In fact maybe we're already living in a big brother reality.

After all I've never seen the bones inside my body (or anyone elses for that matter).

I've seen x-rays but who's to say they are real ?

I've been taught to believe I have a skeleton, but if after all I'm just another android off the production line then maybe I really have an exoskeleton.

No wonder I like The Terminator.

Maybe I just watch too much TV.

Are you for real, or just the figment of someone else's imagination? ;)

On the 'identity theft' thing. Keep in mind that a large percentage of these thefts begin straight from roadside mailboxes that have no lock of any kind. :eek: All these theives have to do is look for boxes with the 'flag' up for outgoing mail. And follow the mail carrier at a safe distance and watch them stuff up a box.

It's a cryin' shame that so many people trust with no common sense applied. And an even deeper shame that we can trust no one in these dark days...:(

Hi Sparks I'm not singling you out here, well maybe I am, I don't mean it as a personal attack in any way.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SuperSparks
I have much more of an expectation privacy from the authorities of state, not because I have anything to hide, but because I don't want to live in a police state.

I don't want to live in a police state either at least not to the extent I believe you are alluding to but I don't kid myself in some degree we all do already and have since the beginning of the Cold War. This sounds like something right out of the X Files but I assure you it is true, around the time of the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC) The Senate passed the McCarran Act or Internal Security Act of 1950. Among other things, it authorizes the creation of concentration camps "for emergency situations." Also included in the act that didn't get much attention at the time probably because it didn't sound as alarming as concentration camps was the broadening of the FBI's powers. It was at this point in time when J. Edgar Hoover began data mining information on the American Public and all of this was done very quietly. For instance if Johnny or Jane went to a public library and signed out a copy of the Communist Manifesto, or the Little Red School Book or another title that the FBI deemed subversive there name was added to a list. Since then the list of subversive materials has grown as has the list of names. All this done without a subpoena. As you have said before what has started out in the States wings it way over the pond.

If the police suspect me of a crime and want to tap my telephone it has to be authorised either by a judge or the Home Secretary himself in the UK (I'm not sure which). That's fine, because someone is overseeing the police and the appropriate checks and balances are in place. But with the Internet the Western democracies to a greater or lesser degree seem to want some very insidious blanket powers to read peoples emails and to know what web sites they've visited, and I have a real problem with that. Once you remove the oversight and the checks and balances then you're on a very slippery slope indeed.

I can only respond to this with I know for a fact. There is an arm of the R.C.M.P. which deals soley with criminal behaviour on the interent. I have a friend who works in this department. While avoiding details of specific cases she has told me of her typical routine. A suspected pervert has been contacted or makes contact in a chat room where these perverts are known to frequent. The said pervert shares a file presumably child pornographic image and this file is then traced back to its sender. At this point she hacks her way into the pervert's computer installing software such as a keyboard logger and inventories the contents of the computer's data. Either concurrent or afterwards her part in the process one of her fellow officers chats with this sicko until the perv suggest a meeting or they have gathered enough information for a warrant of arrest. These "insidious blanket powers" to some extent are already inplace here.

We've lost far too many hard won rights since 9/11/2001, in the name of "protecting" us from terrorism, even though there was plenty of intelligence before the attack on the WTC which wasn't acted upon. Why do they need a million times as much intelligence that still won't be acted upon (if only because of information overload)?

Knowledge is power and if it prevents another 9/11 I'm all for it. Although I have to admit it doesn't appear that they have done much with knowledge and too much with power. Just what happened to all all those Weapons of Mass Destruction?

Nor do I want to live in a Plutocracy either, and I don't like the way the RIAA, MPAA, et al are able to use "campaign funds" to effectively buy their own politicians to write their own laws. Very bad laws at that. And every bad law that the US gets seems to wing it's way to these shores eventually. These are people who are too stupid to keep a website up and running for more than 5 minutes at a time - do we really need them dictating laws regarding the Internet?

I whole heartedly agree with you on this one. The actions of the RIAA appear akin to a legalized mafia and exposes the grafting politicians as they really are. God forbid the RIAA should try this in Canada! Parliament's trough is already crowded enough with greedy pigs. I'm sure there are several unsavory characters in the House of Commons that would dance to thier tune given enough inducement and I don't think Parliament could survive the ensuing fiascos and scandals.

Oh yes, one other point; another member said in another thread "live a clean life and abide by the law and you don't have anything to worry about". I'm sure that a lot of law abiding members of the Communist party in the USSR thought that in the 1930's too, right up to the point where they got a kangaroo court and transportation to the Gulag. If we continue to allow the constant erosion of our democratic rights then we too can get to live in interesting times like that. One of our politicians would fit right in in the role of Heinrich Himmler or Lavrenti Beria. I expect you've got a few in your part of the world too. Or a little closer to home, the House Un-American Activities Comittee gave a few clean-living, law abiding citizens a good shafting too.

I think this might be a little over the top. Public will is elastic and I'm sure can't be stretched that far again.
[/B]

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ridgerunr
It's a cryin' shame that so many people trust with no common sense applied. And an even deeper shame that we can trust no one in these dark days...:(

---

Nicely said. Where and why did it all go wrong? Growing up in the 50's and early 60's the world seemed headed so much closer to Utopia.

Personally I blame the Bee Gees. The 5h1t really hit the fan just as Disco came around. ;) ;)

Calpitor we have had to mention this before, your medication needs addressing once more, all your fears would soon disappear if only a Jenae was President of the USA :D

we already had one woman president and that didnt go over to well...(even though we didnt vote for her) hey at least she pardond her husband from
[***- deleted phrase -***]

heh

TangZ

Our Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) states, in part:

Quote:

---

By using these Forums, you agree to the following:

• You will not use profanity in our forums, and will neither post with language or content that is obscene, sexually oriented, or sexually suggestive nor link to sites that contain such content.

---

Sorry vernon...thought it was xed out enough!!! guess not