WireTapping- Newfound Security? Or Privacy Infringing?

Wiretapping became widespread following the passing of the Patriot Act. Wiretapping was long being used for national safety and citizen protection. While few legal wiretaps are being conducted on a routine basis, the reality is that illegal wiretaps are becoming more prevalent as our country matures and advances its technological innovations. What is wiretapping? Wiretapping is the interception of a phone, internet, or any other communications transmission by encrypting the third party stream tapped into the routine stream. In order to replicate the transmission to the third party line, splitters are used which deviate routine transmission streams into any device capable of recording such transmissions. In a sense, it is a form of electronic eavesdropping. But when is such actions crossing the line?

Mark Klein, an engineer who worked for AT&T for many years, has come forth and announced that AT&T had been secretly tapping into our internet lines and copying all transmission streams being sent and received regardless of what such information contains. The internet cables were replicating all data streams being processed through AT&T’s servers which not only included their customers, but other companies’ customers as well. Why is such information being pulled on a large scale? AT&T has remained tight lipped about the entire operation as anyone involved had been issued a gag order.

How was Mark Klein able to remain immune to the gag order imposed on anyone involved? That’s because Klein was not involved. He was competent enough to comprehend the exact nature of why large transmission cables were being relocated to a maximum security room. According to Klein, AT&T installed splitters to the transmission cables to replicate all incoming and outgoing transmissions. Now that AT&T has been unveiled regarding the illegal wiretap operation, where does this stand with the ethical principles of this country?

Since the unveiling, this ordeal has erupted into a large bombshell considering the secrecy involved and the amount of information being pulled. Klein has stepped forward urging Congress to refrain from issuing the telecommunications companies immunity for such actions. Klein has teamed up with lawyers from the Electronic Frontier Foundation which opened a class action lawsuit against AT&T [Hepting v. AT&T] in federal court.

Wiretapping holds its benefits for national security as well as citizen protection; however, it is crucial to maintain a strict provisional guideline, to regulate how wiretaps may be performed. It is evident that if unregulated wiretapping becomes prevalent in our society, the hunger for power will emerge and the rights our founding fathers established for us can be considered a thing of the past. Not only will such actions open the door for even more privacy infringing activities, the structure of our country may collapse without the proper balance of power.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/07/AR2007110700006.html#
http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs9-wrtp.htm

Keylogging software- new wave of security? or just an invasion of privacy

Keystroke logging software has been around for nearly as long as the internet has but what invoked the creation of such a software? Frankly, is it a new wave of security for individuals to conform to or rather a Constitutionally imposed invasion of privacy?
Keystroke logging software began as a virus in which hackers would deliver such a software to unsuspecting victims to obtain crucial personal information such as social security numbers, credit card numbers, and account information. What it does is it secretly runs on a computer without the impending victim's knowledge, then records all keyboard activity and stores all information for the perpetrator to obtain.
Keystroke logging software began to take notice to private citizens as well as government agencies as a useful tool to use around the home and office. What emerged, was the creation of new found software which allowed private citizens to purchase to install on their own computers or where desired. In 2000, the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) first implemented the use of keystroke logging software on the computer of Nicodemo Scarfo. Again in 2007, ecstasy manufacturers, Mark Forrester and Dennis Alba, had become the victims to the FBI's keystroke logging software. Is that permissible? Should there be an exception for such extreme cases?
According to the 9th District Court of Appeals, the federal government did not violate Scarfo’s Fourth Amendment rights and have right to proceed with such acts as long as the information they are obtaining are related to the warrant.
Now if the courts view using keylogging software as outside the meaning of the Fourth Amendment then does that mean police departments around the country will begin implementing the procedure into their daily patrol routines? Are we now fully vulnerable to having our right to privacy invaded? If the courts have established that keystroke logging software is permissible as long as it pertains to warrants, then installing cameras or other technological items within a dwelling may be around the corner as well. One issue that must be imposed is will the courts approve of law enforcement using such software to develop probable cause?


http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9741357-7.html
http://forums.techjunkie.com/3241_userID=1245235063/T=14353-32/Keystroke_logging

RFID technology: added safety measure? or secret eye?

The 21st century has sparked extraordinary levels of new found technology which has garnished new items from revolutionary computers to remote monitoring equipment. But one particular item has caught my eye, Radio Frequency ID (RFID) chips. Such technology has been around for decades but it was not until the past several years, that RFID chips have been implemented on various personal documents such as passports, drivers' licenses, and electronic toll emitters. RFID chips work by emitting a small frequency towards an RFID reader which in turn decrypts the information available to a nearby computer coded for such information. This new way of monitoring gained enormous backing by the U.S. government, particularly during the Bush administration. It was not until October of 2006, when President Bush announced that all U.S. passports will bear an RFID chip, essentially wirelessly transmitting personal information such as name, age, gender, address, date of birth, and a photograph. In addition, several states have slowly begun implementing RFID chips into driver's licenses. What brought forth this new form of monitoring?

RFID chips are intended to expand on the convenience of citizens as well as government officials who simply need a quicker and much more efficient way to identify an individual when needed. There are two types of RFID chips, active and passive. Active chips emit information consistently and have a greater range for the acquisition of data, whereas passive chips emit information but such information is stored on a database where the information may be decoded. But what about the security measures for such personal information? Proponents argue that such chips are encrypted with state of the art technology which aids in preventing potential hackers from swiping such personal information. However, hackers have still found their way into such personal information.

To potentially ease citizen worry, the Bush administration issued a statement back in 2006 stating "the new passports will be outfitted with anti-skimming material in the front cover to mitigate the threat of the information being surreptitiously scanned from afar."

What exactly is anti-skimming material? well, according to the Bush administration, the "anti-skimming material" is a physical component which shields the frequency from the RFID chip whenever the passport cover is closed. But what about drivers' licenses?

While there are clearly concerns over privacy matters regarding RFID chips, there are quite a few benefits to them as well. RFID chips are actually implanted into vehicles, in which alarms may be remotely deactivated as well as if the vehicle were to get stolen, there is a greater possibility of locating the vehicle; inventory of merchandise to let stores know exactly what is selling and what may need to be shifted; credit cards, many individuals probably are not aware that the swipe free convenience incorporates an RFID chip; animal tracking; as well as human implants, which was initially experimented on by Kevin Warwick, a British professor of cybernetics in 1998.

It is currently unclear on where the RFID chips will lead to, as the door is currently wide open.

Unfortunately, there is no indicator on when an individual is being "scanned" which eliminates consent but what about if there is no probable cause or need to scan? Does that indicate a strong vulnerability among those with RFID chips on their personal documents? Maybe, it is difficult to assess without proper empirical evidence suggesting one way or the other. If such instances arise, is that essentially the government intending to act like "Big Brother"? Is our country ready for such overwhelming technology that it may compromise citizens' personal liberties and freedoms? Let's hope not.

-------------------------------------------------------------

http://tech.yahoo.com/blog/raskin/447

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/52270.html?wlc=1253601801

http://news.cnet.com/Passports-to-get-RFID-chip-implants/2100-7348_3-5913644.html

Technological Innovations: Overview

Technology has boomed in our society as a reliable and effective tool to aid in law enforcement practices as well as a convenience in individuals' lives. As technology expands, new uses for such technology becomes readily apparent and the first to take hold of such opportunities is our government. The beauty of our government is that there is a checks and balances system which essentially keeps each representative body in check to avoid gaining too much control over our country. It seems now that we are entering a new age where modern technology will begin to monitor our everyday activities without our impending knowledge. Proponents claim it is for our best interests regarding the safety of our country; but is our government beginning to impose on our Constitutional rights?

It is often speculated that our government could ultimately lead to our country's downfall; but is it the government? Or is it rather society's instinctive drive to reach above and beyond towards that futuristic technology aimed to help the world. The problem is not that we are striving for superior technology; it is really that some individuals within various organizations or corporations see the subtly obvious power trip that could be associated with such new found technology. The benefits of our technology obviously outweigh the negative aspects by far simply because our lives have gained much more convenience compared to those who have lived in our nation's history far before such revolutionary technological innovations. Our technology is clearly set forth to help our society as a whole but there is unfortunately the vulnerability of being possibly subjected to big brother monitoring as well. The question that really must be posed is, are we as a collective society ready for that vulnerability?