Live data from Hacker News

The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

cybernews.com

151–160 of 182 posts

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#151

So the US, with its Constitution protecting the people from its Government, is allowing this whilst also considering Edward Snowden a traitor? It seems something has shifted 180 degrees since WW2, and the US Government has quietly won the game where the goal was to shit on the entirety of the history upon which it was built whilst, at precisely the same time, pointing to the Constitution as the reason why "America is…

> It seems something has shifted 180 degrees since WW2 The Twin Towers were destroyed, the Pentagon was damaged, and an additional plane was crashed, via a successful conspiracy that could have been detected by blanket, passive surveillance. That's what changed. The threat model the US defense department is concerned about has changed significantly since WWII. The threat to Pax Americana is not direct military interv…

So that is how liberty dies, and terrorism wins... With thunderous applause from a scared and panic citizenry that unable to understand statistical risk instead believing the propaganda of fear that will ultimately see the erosion of both their liberty and the safety they so foolishly believed the government would provide if they just gave up that essential liberty

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#152
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The United States used to be an example to the world. As a nation it used to take its founding principles seriously. That started changing during the cold war and became most obvious post-9/11.

> The United States used to be an example to the world. Or so the americans say. Who else ?

The millions of people who left their countries to come here.

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#153
post #8

Firefox (or OSs) should add a feature that randomly makes requests to a bunch of unrelated websites just to mess up their data collection and render it useless. This can only work if it's widely deployed.

Authorities will either look at the source code, compel the authors to explain how it works, push their own changes for the code in question, or just empirically monitor the random behavior and build models to filter such noise.

This is not a matter of "fix everything pill" tho, but a fight where we have to erode and degrade their capabilities, this is an arms race, you don't just stop fighting because the other side has got better weapons and systems, you develop your own gorilla capabilities

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#154
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm wondering how that helps them out, exactly? All they see is HTTPS requests to iMessage/Reddit/HN or WhatsApp. They can't look inside the actual payload.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/legal-loopholes-unrestrained-n...

That doesn't address GP's point. You can redirect encrypted traffic all you want. That won't help you read its content.

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is due process required when someone points a gun at the police? Charges them with a knife? Tries to run them over? I watch 2-3 new police bodycam videos per day thanks to some neat Youtube channels (Police Activity and Real World Police). I've seen maybe one or two shootings on those channels that were clearly wrong, out of hundreds that were justified or a reasonable person could find to be justified. Wondering if…

I would say that there is a spectrum to backing the claim of "due process" w/ time constraints. For example body cams can really help validate that there was a gun, pointed at someone, and the person was threatening... IMO Governments need to be quick to integrate technologies that can reinforce the true spirit of their laws such that true justice (not just legalism) is applied.

I'm pretty surprised how well the bodycams thing is working out overall.

Of course there are rare cases where they "lose" the footage or whatever, but the sheer volume of videos coming out makes me believe that it's working in most cases (even high profile or controversial cases).

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#156
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>you're fucked I'm sorry but any anecdotal spinning of history and current events supporting a bold claim about the downfall of western society is just outright non scientific, immeasurable, and quite frankly below educated discourse. Now if you have a thesis about the sunset of western hegemony backed by reduced gdp numbers, geopolitical influence, and crime stats, thats a more worthwhile discussion. Call me old fas…

Going full tinfoil hat... We've seen the GDP number manipulated during this crisis, Gov propping the economy up with lots of self-debt that we cant pay back. We've seen that other developed counties in the world bawk at us. Example being the American woman who killed a guy in the UK by driving on the wrong side; and the US said she had diplomatic immunity, when she did not. [0] Crime stats... Crime isnt crime if it i…

> A sitting president was impeached, but not removed from office. He was charged with high-crimes.

> lots of self-debt that we cant pay back.

Neither of those work that way. I agree on the 2-party stacked system though.

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to find a way to whitelist which apps can access the network, but I haven't found a way for that yet Ironically this is very easy on W10 and OSX. But you can do it on Linux with AppArmor.

I don't suppose you have any pointers on how to make that a reality in Ubuntu/Debian? I too would be very interested in being able to configure whitelist only network connections.

The linux desktop security model is severely broken [1]. Just use Qubes if you want to control access to resources without losing your mind.

[1] https://forums.whonix.org/t/fixing-the-desktop-linux-securit...

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brave ? https://brave.com/ (I'm asking, not endorsing)

Thanks for sharing. First I've heard of this company. It's definitely an interesting position as they look to be providing the browser (viewer) as well as the ad platform. It's unclear if they are hiding/replacing website ads with their own and how the websites are getting their revenue otherwise.

> If you want to support sites in Brave without earning tokens through ads then you’ll have to use your own money.

I think this is their monetization path that allows you to opt out of ad supported internet.

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#159

At one point in time, we used to universally celebrate people like Professor John Raines, who broke into FBI offices to steal documents related to COINTELPRO. He 'evaded capture' and was an American hero. [0] Yesterday, Judicial Watch published the DoJ's release of the electronic communication from 7/31/2016, where FBI agent Peter Strzok opened Crossfire Hurricane. [1, 2] Despite the magnanimity of the disclosure, th…

In what way should the magnanimity of a disclosure affect it's coverage? What does it mean for a disclosure to be generous?

Re: The FBI tracking your browsing history without a warrant might be the beginning

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>As for individual citizens, it appears most still see the threat of asymmetric warfare as a more profound threat to their life and livelihood than passive, blanket government surveillance I don't think this necessarily follows. I don't think most Americans support the Patriot Act but its basically known at this point that Public Opinion has no effect on Policy here. Also how much the public understanding of what the…

Question wording drastically changes the results on polling whether people support the Patriot Act, but broadly speaking, it appears most Americans support its existence and most Americans believe it is in need of moderation. I don't think it's as simple as "Public opinion has no effect on policy;" it's that the policy response to "most people aren't happy, but nobody can gel behind a concrete changelist" is "stay th…

https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/fi...

TLDR: Citizen opinions don't have an effect on policy.

I agree about education though. It's a tricky problem. Clearly people aren't informed enough to make coherent decisions on many policy issues but they have to trust that the slick looking lawyer they are voting for actually does understand and has their best interests at heart?

Post reply on HN