Sign in to follow this  

Utah ISP breaks silence over government server installed on its network

Recommended Posts

V-Tech    211

facebook-sweden-data-center.jpg

 

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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alwaysonacoffebreak    692

1 server to track all the traffic? Wut?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+FloatingFatMan    13,397

1 server to track all the traffic? Wut?

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

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Majesticmerc    871

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.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nefarious Trigger    6,987

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HawkMan    5,162

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nefarious Trigger    6,987

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled    3,880

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theyarecomingforyou    9,200

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Rev    318

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.