IP: Re: Internet Wiretapping (fwd)

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 12:23:58 -0700
> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> From: Jim Warren <jwarren () well com>
> Subject: Re: IP: Internet Wiretapping (fwd)
>
> > > no reasonable expectation of privacy in the identities of
> > > their e-mail correspondents, or the addresses of Web
> > > pages they visit.
> > >
> > > Ashcroft said he believed "To:" and "From:" lines of
> > > e-mail could be intercepted without a court order, but
> > > "Subject:" lines would require a judge's signature. "We're
> > > not asking that we get content or the subject," he replied.
> > > "We want information on who sent it and to  whom it was
> > > sent."
>
> BEWARE!  "Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it."
>
> Almost 30 years ago, in the early 1970's, I was chatting with Bill 
> McKeeman, then CIS Chair at UC-Santa Cruz, about possible dissertation 
> topics.  As an aside, he mentioned that he had been approached by the FBI, 
> offering him hefty funds to do research on computer-manipulation of "large 
> sparse matrices" -- large numeric arrays with relatively few non-0 entries.
>
> When Bill asked what their intended use was, they told him they wanted to 
> build an association matrix for every pair of citizens in the nation -- 
> where 0 would mean the two had no known contact with each other, 1 would 
> mean that they DID have a known contact directly with each other, 2 would 
> mean they had contact via a mutual friend, etc.
>
> They said they wanted it to track mob connections in organized crime. -*
>
> But that was back when computers were slow and expensive, and had "tiny" 
> storage capacities, by comparison to what we have on our desktops, today.
>
> McKeeman flat turned them down, and didn't even have to explain to me why.
>
> How far down the road to Orwell's Big Brother-Hood, we have traveled, and 
> how quickly we seem eager to continue.  But, like the told the tom cat 
> before his operation, "It's for our own good."
>
> --jim
> Jim Warren; jwarren () well com, technology & public policy columnist & advocate
> 345 Swett Rd, Woodside CA 94062; voice/650-851-7075; fax/off due to spam-glut
>
> [self-inflating puffery: Playboy Foundation Hugh Hefner First-Amendment Award;
> Soc.of Prof.Journalists-Nor.Calif. James Madison Freedom-of-Information Award;
> founded InfoWorld, Dr.Dobb's Journal, and Computers, Freedom & Privacy Confs.;
> Electronic Frontier Foundation's Pioneer Award (in its first year), blah blah]
>
>
> *- But of course, that was also at a time when J. Edgar Hoover was saying 
> there was NO Mafia or organized crime in the USA ... while at the same 
> time conducting massive evesdropping on political and other public 
> figures, sans court orders.
>
> It was a time when the FBI *never* had its proposed budget reduced by 
> members of Congress -- who didn't know what Edgar might have on them (or 
> maybe they DID know), and long after JFK and RFK didn't dare to fire 
> Hoover, even though they hated him and thought of him as a despot.
>
> Hollywood associations were similarly snooped.  E.g., Desi first learned 
> that Luci was pregnant via a "friendly" call from J. Edgar, who got the 
> info from one of his wiretaps.  And ... while Hoover lived, ALL cop movies 
> portrayed the FBI in only the most-stalwart and righteous terms (even 
> while they were bugging Martin Luther King, Jr.'s intimate bedroom 
> conversations).



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/