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

[Louis APONTE <LouisAponte () WEBER EDU>]

Hi
 
"At the risk of turning this into a political discussion...
 
Yea, no lets not go that route, please. I have been a lurker member of this list for a few years. My CIO wanted me to 
ask a question and I had to drop my anonymous status. Come to think of it he didn't appreciate the whole reference to 
anonymous, different list serve Sir. I have often found good technical advise here, and sometimes its a little mean 
here, other times its like geek therapy. The DHS and foreign nationals conversation is just therapy.
The AT&T routing was us, the recent hijacking of internet traffic was other countries. 
 
Dr McCoy said it best "I ve found that evil usually triumphs...unless good is very, very careful"
 
We should all agree our highest mandate is to be very, very careful.
 
LA

> > > On 5/31/2012 at 7:41 AM, in message <C443986985BB794BA92CB1A458AB14F202DE052DDE () FACCMS7 it muohio edu>, 
> > > "Bradley, Stephen W. Mr." <bradlesw () MUOHIO EDU> wrote:

At the risk of turning this into a political discussion that may have been the intent of the framers of our 
constitution but that was too many elections ago.

Who are you going to vote into office that will change anything?  Both of the major parties do the same thing.  They 
both push through legislation that makes it easier for agencies like the NSA to run amok.

We have given up too much freedom all in the name of safety and security and it is too late to save us from ourselves.

Steve



-----Original Message-----
From: The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:SECURITY () listserv educause edu] On Behalf Of David 
Pirolo
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 5:03 PM
To: SECURITY () listserv educause edu
Subject: Re: [SECURITY] Welcome! You're now on the official DHS watchlist

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-w
> > > or 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.