The Nightstar Zoo

Nightstar IRC Network - irc.nightstar.net
It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:15 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 11:31 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 1:53 pm
Posts: 373
This shows you the privacy implications of our current, real-world "it's just meta-data for fighting terrorists".

You can't tell what's fighting terrorists until you collect all the meta-data.

_________________
I hope Para never plays with Tenzy. The result would be terrifying.
Para and Petey need to have some dialog together. Just because.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 3:11 am 
Offline
Safari Exhibit
Safari Exhibit

Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 12:33 am
Posts: 148
Is anyone else seeing two of the same comic, one right under the other? I'm running Chromium browser in Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (Long-Term Support).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 6:59 am 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:38 am
Posts: 373
Same here with Firefox.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:46 am 
Offline
Reptile House Exhibit
Reptile House Exhibit
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 10:35 pm
Posts: 314
Location: Nebulae beyond Gamma Draconis
Well, there's also a fact that you need access to some metadata to actually deliver the message.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 5:33 pm 
Offline
Intern
Intern
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 3:55 pm
Posts: 1277
Location: City of Brotherly Love
keybounce wrote:
This shows you the privacy implications of our current, real-world "it's just meta-data for fighting terrorists".


Privacy has been an illusion in our world pretty much since shortly after 9/11. The only way to find true privacy now is to go "off the grid" and leave our modern society altogether.

_________________
The MacNut
Artist and writer of The Vanguard, a space opera superhero comic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:40 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 10:40 pm
Posts: 625
Location: Land of the webbed feet
macnut wrote:
keybounce wrote:
This shows you the privacy implications of our current, real-world "it's just meta-data for fighting terrorists".
Privacy has been an illusion in our world pretty much since shortly after 9/11. The only way to find true privacy now is to go "off the grid" and leave our modern society altogether.

It was largely gone before . . . though that's no reason to give important information away as so many people do.

Facebook, Livejournal, etc are major security risks, but nobody seems to care . . .

--FreeFlier


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 12:34 am 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 8:10 am
Posts: 387
M[i]ech wrote:
Well, there's also a fact that you need access to some metadata to actually deliver the message.


Exactly. This isn't much different from the post office knowing when and where a letter has been sent from - which they do know, thanks to the postmark.

People get upset about the privacy implications of the wrong aspects of things. In this case, the very basic information required to make sure a message gets from point A to point B.

It's much like the license agreements on places like DeviantArt and Tumblr, which state that the sites have the rights for editing and distribution of your work - which is absolutely necessary in order to create thumbnails and to actually host your pictures on an open platform.

These aren't privacy or intellectual property concerns, these are the very basic aspects required in order to make use of even the most basic technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:34 am 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:38 am
Posts: 373
Quote:
Exactly. This isn't much different from the post office knowing when and where a letter has been sent from - which they do know, thanks to the postmark.
There's a difference between the post office knowing that for the moment when they have to deliver a letter and the post office keeping that knowledge forever to build a map of your relationships.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:55 am 
Offline
Intern
Intern
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:52 pm
Posts: 1125
Cifer wrote:
Quote:
Exactly. This isn't much different from the post office knowing when and where a letter has been sent from - which they do know, thanks to the postmark.
There's a difference between the post office knowing that for the moment when they have to deliver a letter and the post office keeping that knowledge forever to build a map of your relationships.

In this case, the post office probably would've forgotten all about the letter except a worker who knows the recipient noticed that it came from a close relative disaster zone.

_________________
If you need to use a squeegee, they're probably at least Laz-4


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:25 am 
Offline
Intern
Intern
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 3:55 pm
Posts: 1277
Location: City of Brotherly Love
Cifer wrote:
Quote:
Exactly. This isn't much different from the post office knowing when and where a letter has been sent from - which they do know, thanks to the postmark.
There's a difference between the post office knowing that for the moment when they have to deliver a letter and the post office keeping that knowledge forever to build a map of your relationships.


Which would be excused under making message delivery more "efficient". After all, you're most likely to send messages to people you know rather than strangers, right? The possibility of that data being used for other purposes would be entirely incidental.

_________________
The MacNut
Artist and writer of The Vanguard, a space opera superhero comic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 10:37 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 8:10 am
Posts: 387
Cifer wrote:
Quote:
Exactly. This isn't much different from the post office knowing when and where a letter has been sent from - which they do know, thanks to the postmark.
There's a difference between the post office knowing that for the moment when they have to deliver a letter and the post office keeping that knowledge forever to build a map of your relationships.



In the case given in the strip, all Chinook needed to see was 'this is from a disaster zone'.

In real life, I'm fairly certain that routers don't actually save that metadata for very long, because that would require routers to have petabytes of storage, considering the sheer number of packets that go through them daily, and how much of said packet is relevant metadata.

You're thinking of point servers, which generally don't care, certainly not enough to try to map individual users, unless there's a specific reason to. They'll save the information, because they have to, for legal reasons, but they're restricted from using it except in cases of possible unlawful activity.

The thing you seem to be worried about specifically, is, in North America, at least to my knowledge, only allowed via a wiretap warrant.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:05 am 
Offline
Reptile House Exhibit
Reptile House Exhibit

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:50 pm
Posts: 253
Kendrakirai wrote:
Cifer wrote:
Quote:
Exactly. This isn't much different from the post office knowing when and where a letter has been sent from - which they do know, thanks to the postmark.
There's a difference between the post office knowing that for the moment when they have to deliver a letter and the post office keeping that knowledge forever to build a map of your relationships.



In the case given in the strip, all Chinook needed to see was 'this is from a disaster zone'.

In real life, I'm fairly certain that routers don't actually save that metadata for very long, because that would require routers to have petabytes of storage, considering the sheer number of packets that go through them daily, and how much of said packet is relevant metadata.

You're thinking of point servers, which generally don't care, certainly not enough to try to map individual users, unless there's a specific reason to. They'll save the information, because they have to, for legal reasons, but they're restricted from using it except in cases of possible unlawful activity.

The thing you seem to be worried about specifically, is, in North America, at least to my knowledge, only allowed via a wiretap warrant.


For land-line phones the government started collecting all the PIN data shortly after 9/11. That's the number a call is from, and to, and the time of start and end of call. The data was already being saved by the phone companies anyway for billing. (Yes, even local calls.)

The shear amount of data overwhelmed the ability of any available data-base at that time to put it into a reasonably searchable or organized form. They've had about 16 years to solve that.

For cell-phones a similar activity was, IIRC, one of the main things Snowden revealed was happening. I was and am boggled that people were apparently surprised or distressed that their public broadcasts were not being given more secrecy than the land-lines.

Many of the Internet backbone systems that actually carry the bulk of the traffic that leaves your local network/service provider are owned by the US Government, if you think the government doesn't keep the meta-data on that, I may well have a bridge for you somewhere.

Traffic analysis, who calls or emails who and how often, and the simple fact of "is the data encrypted or not", is the sort of thing the government looks at. A lot. The NSA and other intel agencies admit to collecting all of that sort of meta-data, and then putting it in a data-base, they're not supposed to collect on US citizens, but they admit to collecting the data on citizens as an "incidental" part of foreign collections (you can't be sure the people communicating are US Citizens without an investigation after all, this part is actually a legitimate excuse). But they then make the full data-base accessible to groups like the FBI, who are forbidden to COLLECT that data without a warrant, but can USE the data if someone else makes it available even without a warrant.

So, don't count on them needing a warrant or needing to request the data from someone else.

The government probably has pretty much all the meta-data on your communications it wants. And the same is true for everyone else. But that's one hell of a haystack for security by obscurity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:54 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:53 pm
Posts: 465
I honestly figure that anything I do online can be tracked and viewed if someone cared to. My response is that I don't do anything online that I mind being tracked, and the likelihood of someone caring to look for my data in particular is practically nil.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:40 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 10:40 pm
Posts: 625
Location: Land of the webbed feet
Arcanestomper wrote:
I honestly figure that anything I do online can be tracked and viewed if someone cared to. My response is that I don't do anything online that I mind being tracked, and the likelihood of someone caring to look for my data in particular is practically nil.

Pretty much.

With some of my things, it would be embarrassing, but if someone tried to blackmail me, I'd set them up for arrest and take the embarrassment.

Kipling wrote:
. . . Once you have paid him the danegeld, you will never be rid of the dane!

. . . Reverse the payment. :twisted:

--FreeFlier


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:01 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:53 pm
Posts: 465
Really the anonymity provided by the internet is misleading. It's a public space not a private one. I don't own the servers this is being run on, or the network backbones connecting them. What I say here, or anywhere else online, is essentially like talking to someone in a mall. I'm not going to go to some mall security office and demand they remove their security tapes showing when I arrived, what stores, I shopped in, or who I talked to. And I won't be surprised if other people garner that information from them. But at the same time I don't expect anyone to be specifically looking through them for me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:06 am 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 8:10 am
Posts: 387
Doug Lampert wrote:
Kendrakirai wrote:

In the case given in the strip, all Chinook needed to see was 'this is from a disaster zone'.

In real life, I'm fairly certain that routers don't actually save that metadata for very long, because that would require routers to have petabytes of storage, considering the sheer number of packets that go through them daily, and how much of said packet is relevant metadata.

You're thinking of point servers, which generally don't care, certainly not enough to try to map individual users, unless there's a specific reason to. They'll save the information, because they have to, for legal reasons, but they're restricted from using it except in cases of possible unlawful activity.

The thing you seem to be worried about specifically, is, in North America, at least to my knowledge, only allowed via a wiretap warrant.


For land-line phones the government started collecting all the PIN data shortly after 9/11. That's the number a call is from, and to, and the time of start and end of call. The data was already being saved by the phone companies anyway for billing. (Yes, even local calls.)

The shear amount of data overwhelmed the ability of any available data-base at that time to put it into a reasonably searchable or organized form. They've had about 16 years to solve that.

For cell-phones a similar activity was, IIRC, one of the main things Snowden revealed was happening. I was and am boggled that people were apparently surprised or distressed that their public broadcasts were not being given more secrecy than the land-lines.

Many of the Internet backbone systems that actually carry the bulk of the traffic that leaves your local network/service provider are owned by the US Government, if you think the government doesn't keep the meta-data on that, I may well have a bridge for you somewhere.

Traffic analysis, who calls or emails who and how often, and the simple fact of "is the data encrypted or not", is the sort of thing the government looks at. A lot. The NSA and other intel agencies admit to collecting all of that sort of meta-data, and then putting it in a data-base, they're not supposed to collect on US citizens, but they admit to collecting the data on citizens as an "incidental" part of foreign collections (you can't be sure the people communicating are US Citizens without an investigation after all, this part is actually a legitimate excuse). But they then make the full data-base accessible to groups like the FBI, who are forbidden to COLLECT that data without a warrant, but can USE the data if someone else makes it available even without a warrant.

So, don't count on them needing a warrant or needing to request the data from someone else.

The government probably has pretty much all the meta-data on your communications it wants. And the same is true for everyone else. But that's one hell of a haystack for security by obscurity.


Oh, I have no illusions that the metadata is saved on backbone routers, but like I said, I have doubts that they can keep that for very long. EXABYTES of data travel through the Internet every year, and theres simply no reasonable way to store the headers from all those packets. If you think the landline headers was an unreasonable amount of data to store and -what's the verb for database?- multiply that by MILLIONS of times, since each packet is essentially the call header *every packet*, which are thousands of times a second. I don't know precisely how big backbone packets generally are, but they can't be too large.

What makes it more difficult is that unlike phone numbers, IPs are generally not static, even for DSL and cable. An IP isn't permanently assigned to you, as a user. The header information has your general location (your ISPs nearest server to you) but not specifically which user has that IP at any given time. That has to be gained from the ISP, unless a specific request is made.

Incidentally, I also question why people expect what they're doing IN PUBLIC to be private. Though, that said, more and more people are going cell-only, with no landlines, and it's not really feasible or possible to know when you're in private or in public.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 2:44 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 1:53 pm
Posts: 373
You don't have to keep headers from all the packets.

Heck, only about 14 bytes of data from each Syn packet -- 4 bytes of origin, 4 bytes of destination, 2 bytes of port, 4 bytes of time. And it will compress nicely.

For UDP's? Source and destination, and a count of how many times that pair has spoken that day.

Really cheap. High speed NAND memory, and now terrabyte SSD's?

Sure, the first year they might have needed a raid to write the data fast enough. Now, it's trivial.

===

Now, let me point out the real issue here. Re-read this thread, and pay attention to the comments here where people dismiss privacy.

Pay attention to the way this topic is now discussed.

People are now getting used to the idea of "I don't have an expectation of privacy".

People. Are now getting used to. "There is no privacy, everything I do is monitored, and that's OK".

*THAT* is the scary.

_________________
I hope Para never plays with Tenzy. The result would be terrifying.
Para and Petey need to have some dialog together. Just because.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:19 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:53 pm
Posts: 465
Well personally I'm not "getting used to it" I'm young enough that it's always been that way for me. It's not that I'm okay with the fact that everything I do be monitored. I would in fact be fairly mad if I found out someone was spying on me in places I do consider private. But as I said I don't consider the internet to be one of those places. So if I have something I don't want monitored I don't do it online. Just like I wouldn't do it in public anywhere. Discussions like these always seem to be based on the fact that the internet has somehow changed to become less private, but I've never seen any reason to think it was private in the first place.

Plus frankly you're far more likely to have your data monitored by companies for commercial reasons that the government. If you don't like that, then you're going to need to start up your own ISP.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:08 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 8:10 am
Posts: 387
Arcanestomper wrote:
Well personally I'm not "getting used to it" I'm young enough that it's always been that way for me. It's not that I'm okay with the fact that everything I do be monitored. I would in fact be fairly mad if I found out someone was spying on me in places I do consider private. But as I said I don't consider the internet to be one of those places. So if I have something I don't want monitored I don't do it online. Just like I wouldn't do it in public anywhere. Discussions like these always seem to be based on the fact that the internet has somehow changed to become less private, but I've never seen any reason to think it was private in the first place.

Plus frankly you're far more likely to have your data monitored by companies for commercial reasons that the government. If you don't like that, then you're going to need to start up your own ISP.



Honestly, if anything, the Internet has become MORE private. Passwords are locked up better in properly-configured systems, secure connections are everywhere, making it more difficult to snoop on, people have routers that automatically act as firewalls, meaning it's harder for remote infiltration to work, etc.

It's LOCAL networks that are the weak point, now, where they used to be the strongest. In the olden days of 20 years ago, wireless was rare, and you generally needed physicall access in order to break into a home network. Now, everything is wifi, and all it takes is one vulnerable wifi node to crack open your whole network to an experienced hacker - or kid with the right script downloaded from a dodgy site. And with the multitude of people getting online with computers and devices they don't understand, malware has become a boom industry. Just trick somebody into running code that opens up their system to your tender mercies.

The Internet is a public place with certain private spaces - just like the real world. You don't have an expectation of privacy unless you go to a private space, any more than you have an expectation of privacy in a theme park unless you go into one of the washrooms. And even there, you don't have TOTAL privacy.

The entire concept of the Internet is that it's public. Making it PRIVATE is exactly what the telecomms want to do because it'll let them set up private networks where they get to decide who gets access to what, and at what speeds.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group