Re: Welcome! You're now on the official DHS watchlist

[David Pirolo <webmaster () WARNERPACIFIC EDU>]

This almost sounds as if a government were an individual entity making
the decisions.  One of the benefits of our country is that we get a vote
in how we progress, who leads us and which issues and values we are
willing to compromise in the name of national security, freedom and
safety.  Its not us vs the government- we make up the government.  Where
I see the issue is in people viewing issues from a current trend
perspective and not viewing the longer term impact; which is much harder
to see without historical context and a global perspective.

It certainly makes it easier for DHS (and others) to see what the
perspectives are of this community as our email conversations are
published. http://seclists.org/educause/

David Pirolo

On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 19:53 +0000, Manjak, Martin wrote:
> And the irony and tragedy of all this is that citizens come to distrust their government and are less likely to 
> cooperate with it.  It's not unlike community policing. If the police are viewed with suspicion, they alienate the 
> very people they are supposedly protecting, and make their job that much more difficult for themselves. 
>
> This works both ways. If a government views its citizens with distrust, it will become increasingly alienated from 
> its own people, and see its interests, and prerogatives, as distinct from those of the citizenry. At that point, its 
> primary focus is not on protecting people, but protecting itself from the people.
>
> Marty Manjak
> ISO
> University at Albany
>  
> The University at Albany will never ask you to reveal your password. Please ignore all such requests.                 
>     
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU] On Behalf Of Solem, 
> Vik P.
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 3:40 PM
> To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
> Subject: Re: [SECURITY] Welcome! You're now on the official DHS watchlist
>
> When I read a story about this topic, I wonder if the story is simply true or if it is designed to sound simple 
> enough for a news byte (mis-spelling intended).
>
> Is someone really looking at a list of people whose email contain a simple list of keywords, or is that list 
> contained in a few hundred lines of a 500,000 line program with a complex parsing algorithm that does the scanning?
>
> I used to believe that latter was typically the case, but I have noticed a trend in our national government.  With 
> the renewal of the USA PATRIOT act, the continued use of the  no-fly list (classified secret), and the passing of the 
> NDAA.  We can see that the federal government seeks to monitor without any accountability, block people from 
> traveling without having to tell them why (ever), and to do so with the power of the military operating within our 
> borders.  hmm - if I disappear after I post this will somebody tell my family? ;^)
>
> -Vik
>
> Vik Solem, CISSP, Sr. Applications Risk Consultant Tufts University, Information Security, vik.solem () tufts edu / 
> 617-627-4326 InfoSec Team: information_security () tufts edu / 617-627-6070
>
>
>
> On May 28, 2012, at 18:54 , Gene Spafford wrote:
>
> > I resent this kind of broadly-based, no-real-reason monitoring.   I suggest we all use some of the words, chosen at 
> > random, in our social media postings.  
> >
> > On May 28, 2012, at 6:42 PM, randy marchany wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks to my buddy, Bryce Galbraith for this link. If you take a look at the Cybersecurity section, all of us have 
> > > used these words in emails since it's our job. The link pretty much says what the topic is.
> > >
> > > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150281/REVEALED-Hundreds-wor
> > > ds-avoid-using-online-dont-want-government-spying-you.html
> > >
> > > To my fellow conspirators who want a pork sandwich in Mexico, I 
> > > salute you! This'll make sense when you read the article. :-)
> > >
> > > -r.