Utah ISP breaks silence over government server installed on its network

[V-Tech]

 

When the government comes knocking on your door, you kind of have to cooperate with them or face the consequences. That's the situation Pete Ashdown, CEO of Utah ISP XMission, was faced with in 2010 after receiving a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Service Act (FISA). The warrant, coming in at just three or four pages, was perfectly clear: install a rack-mount server on your network to track every last bit going in and out from one of your customers, and don't say anything to anyone about this. Ashdown's lawyer said the request was indeed legit, and the box stayed there for a little over half a year. So why talk about it now? Because Pete, like the rest of us, wants a bit of transparency, even if there's a risk the G-Men will come "come back and haunt" him.

 

 

http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/22/utah-isp-government/

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

1 server to track all the traffic? Wut?

[FloatingFatMan]

1 server to track all the traffic? Wut?

For ONE customer. It's in the excerpt, quite clearly.

[+Majesticmerc MVC]

I don't think there's anything significantly wrong with this. There was a warrant, it was specific, and it was targeted at a single customer that, I assume, was a suspect in an ongoing investigation. It's a legit wiretap (although I'd agree that wiretapping for 18 months is a bit excessive)

 

Let's not cloud the issue, PRISM is not the same.

[Dick Montage]

Thank you MajesticMerc - was about to post the same.  This is clearly a honed investigation targeting one individual, with a warrant.  Fully acceptable in my view.

 

Nothing to do with PRISM.

 

Not a threat to civil liberties.

 

Not something they really should have disclosed.

[HawkMan]

So if PRISM was so all encompassing and great, why would they need this server inserted to track on target... Seems as if the PRISM system is greatly exaggerated.

[Dick Montage]

So if PRISM was so all encompassing and great, why would they need this server inserted to track on target... Seems as if the PRISM system is greatly exaggerated.

 

PRISM isn't to target individuals as I understand it.  It takes no forensic data at an individual level.

[Growled Member]

I don't think there's anything significantly wrong with this. There was a warrant, it was specific, it was targeted at a specific customer that, I assume, was a suspect in an ongoing investigation. It's a legit wiretap (although I'd agree that wiretapping for 18 months is a bit excessive)

 

Let's not cloud the issue, PRISM is not the same.

Well said. This was all legit and done legally. 

[theyarecomingforyou]

So if PRISM was so all encompassing and great, why would they need this server inserted to track on target... Seems as if the PRISM system is greatly exaggerated.

It's a work-in-progress. The main server is still being constructed and the technology will continue to develop. It's more the about the principle than the current implementation.

[The Rev]

See, I bet the real danger will come from the govt going up to ISP execs and saying "you don't have to comply, but we'd REALLY love it if you could just let us spy on your subscribers...  And the companies could comply, given that they own the service, and can do whatever they want with it, including spy on their own users themselves...  Basically, it's ISPs that will eventually just agree to have their traffic monitored whenever the govt wants to, if it's not feasible to monitor all traffic constantly... When it is feasible, of course, you better believe the govt will take advantage, with the blessing of ISPs.