6 ms·
Google Pressure Cookers and Backpacks, Get a Visit from the Feds
- bowmessage 13y agoThanks pg, glad to see this article has some actual verification in it. >The Guardian confirmed with the FBI that the agency was aware of the visit, but that it was conducted by local police on Long Island.
- sneak 13y agoRemember: it can't happen here. http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0301001h.html http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0301001h.html
- T_T 13y agoMinority Report, everybody.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- csense 13y ago> Correction: After confirmation from the FBI that its agents weren't involved in the visit, the headline of this piece was changed to "Visit From the Cops" instead of "the Feds." In the interests of accurate reporting, perhaps the HN headline should be corrected as well?
- foobarqux 13y agoI thought we didn't have to worry if we had nothing to hide.
- maqr 13y agoI'm wondering if this kind of thing will be met with outrage or understanding. It seems plausible that the general public could feel more secure as a result of this, as it shows that the government is actively trying to stop terrorism.
- sethbannon 13y agoOur government is sending gangs of armed men to perfectly innocent citizens' doors to interrogate them, simply because the authorities don't like what the people are looking at online. Chilling. Now that PRISM and XKeyscore are being reported on in the main stream media, I hope we'll hear many more stories like this and that this will cause folks to realize that it could easily be their door next time.
- ianterrell 13y agoIt does make you wonder about the reporting rate on these sorts of events. Considering the hostile skepticism on the thread about the article Ms Catalano posted, I would not be surprised if other people (especially those without professional writing credentials and a million-strong twitter audience) had decided not to come forward with their stories in the past.
- x0x0 13y agoit also makes you wonder if the interrogees still get treated with kid gloves when they aren't relatively well off people with access to money (and therefore lawyers) and large publications/audiences with which to complain.
- untog 13y agoConsidering the hostile skepticism on the thread about the article Ms Catalano posted There is nothing wrong with skepticism, and I would dispute that it was "hostile". We can't just go around accepting every story we read because it is a story we want it to be real.
- cgag 13y agoMaybe it's just a matter of perspective but it seems to me to be much more common for people to go around denying stories they don't want to be real (police and government abuses of power).
- griffordson 13y agoWas the same level of skepticism shown when the government claimed that Snowden was lying? Why not? Why is it that a private citizen is automatically doubted when they make a claim that is easily verifiable but when the government makes a claim that has been repeatedly contradicted by multiple people over the span of years, including at least two sitting US Senators, the government's claims are taken at face value? Shouldn't her story get a minimum benefit of doubt until some independent reporting can be done on the claims? Especially when everything she claims is plausible given what is known about the government's capabilities.
- nhance 13y agoQuick question: What if News corp was fed the details of voicemails that they "hacked" through government agencies in an effort to keep the public placated through meaningless news stories? I know it's not on topic, but with everything coming to light, it would not surprise me. Was it ever discovered how News Corp got the private voicemails for their stories?
- boingy 13y agoThey exploited the fact that people didn't change the default passwords on their voicemail (e.g. 1234) and so were able to access them remotely using the same system a legitimate user who needed to access their voicemail remotely would use.
- foobarqux 13y agoAt least he was confronted immediately. Can you imagine if this was used against him at some time in the future as a "pattern of suspicious activity"? Or worse if he was selected via data-mining when looking for suspects of a bombing? It's like finding secret messages in every eight words of the Bible.
- yk 13y agoOr he just randomly fails a background check.
- janj 13y agoIs it a dumb idea to to see if I can get visited after doing some Google searches? Is there a law against trying to get noticed by authorities in this way?
- alex_doom 13y agoWho knows. But now I want to do this to my asshole neighbor who's wifi is open...
- jey 13y agoIt might even be a nice way to get "standing" so you can qualify to sue the government on these issues. (IANAL, but in the past I've seen "standing" being an issue that disqualifies lawsuits, and people doing stunts like this to get standing so they can then sue.)
- mladenkovacevic 13y agoBut everything was conducted with accordance to both our official as well as secret laws right??!! Phew, ok good. As long as everything is on the level.
- clarkmoody 13y agoThe family should have refused to answer questions without an attorney present, as this could easily fall under a 4th Amendment violation on the part of the government. How to resist warrentless searches (roadside checkpoints): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4Ku17CqdZg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4Ku17CqdZg
- gmoore 13y agoperhaps...but it's really hard to take that stand with half dozen armed men are on your porch...
- llamataboot 13y agoThis is what the cops count on. Same as in DUI checkpoints, telling you to just let them search your trunk when they pull you over for speeding and then they'll let you get on your way, etc. The initial response by cops to saying things like "Are you detaining me?" "Am I under arrest or am I free to go?" "Do you have a warrant?" is usually pretty hostile - things like "You don't want to know what happens if I have to wake up the judge for a warrant at this time of night" "Do you have something to hide?" "I'm just doing my job, why don't you just let me do it and we can both get on our way, etc" -- Depending on the personalities of the cops involved, it can rapidly switch back and forth from good cop to bad cop. But they really do work and generally will respect the rule of law if you stand up for it. They are trained to make you give up your rights voluntarily, not to abuse them and possibly have a lawsuit etc on their heads. (Note: this may not apply if you are not white)
- HSO 13y ago> (Note: this may not apply if you are not white) …chilling
- anu_gupta 13y agoDoes any of this apply if you are not a US citizen? As a non-US citizen, if I come to the US on holiday, what rights do I have, if any? [edited to add] Answering my own question, this PDF from the ACLU seems to have some answers: http://www.aclu.org/files/kyr/kyr_english_4.pdf http://www.aclu.org/files/kyr/kyr_english_4.pdf "Non-citizens who are in the United States—no matter what their immigration status—generally have the same constitutional rights as citizens when law enforcement officers stop, question, arrest, or search them or their homes. " However "Non-citizens at the border who are trying to enter the U.S. do not have all the same rights. "
- superconductor 13y agoYou'd have to be a fool to use Google nowadays. You might as well cc the NSA when gmailing somebody.
- a3n 13y agoHow would you do that? cc the NSA I mean?
- stefantalpalaru 13y agohttp://www.nsa.gov/public_info/contacts/index.shtml http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/contacts/index.shtml Maybe the "Public and Media Affairs" department is the most appropriate for some honest self-snitching: nsapao@nsa.gov
- riggins 13y agoI'm worried. Presumably there are few people comfortable with the government having such fine grained detail on your activities.
- angersock 13y agoOh, no, not my activities--but I can absolutely understand the public utility in allowing them such exhaustive resources in verifying the activities of others. What's that? The infrastructure is indistinguishable? Pshaw.
- yarianluis 13y agoDon't like how they use one image at the top which is from a completely different event, as explained at the bottom. The image seems to be chosen to generate a specific emotional response but I'm not sure it actually represents the events covered in the story very honestly.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y agoThey are lucky they weren't harmed.
- syjer 13y agoI thought that now all the google search were over https, so how they were able to track the guy (without direct access to the search data from the google server)?
- AznHisoka 13y agoDay 1 of using DuckDuckGo... starts now.
- angersock 13y agoYou do realize that this is a silly, dumb sentiment, right? The idea that switching one black box for another black box will save you from this is absurd.
- Finster 13y agoSwitching from one provider who definitely logs data and turns it over to the Feds to another provider that at least claim they don't log the data. Granted, you still have to take DuckDuckGo's word for it, but I wouldn't call that "absurd".
- raldu 13y agoThen let's think about decentralized search engines powered by p2p...
- diydsp 13y agohttp://yacy.net/en/index.html http://yacy.net/en/index.html tri-platform, penta-language http://www.faroo.com/hp/p2p/p2p.html http://www.faroo.com/hp/p2p/p2p.html windows-only
- doctorstupid 13y agoThey don't need a search engine's cooperation for this. They need to intercept the http request between a user and the search engine. It might look something like 'GET /search?hl=en&q=pressure_cooker.....' See the recently leaked slides on X-Keyscore.
- foobarbazqux 13y agoAlright, let's do a group experiment. Choose one of the links below: http://www.google.com/search?q=pressure+cooker+backpacks http://www.google.com/search?q=pressure+cooker+backpacks (insecure) https://www.google.com/search?q=pressure+cooker+backpacks https://www.google.com/search?q=pressure+cooker+backpacks (secure) and report back if you get a visit from a squadron of men dressed in green wearing helmets and holding guns. If any reporters clicked on the https link, it's PRISM because the leak is from inside Google, otherwise it's XKeyscore. If we get results from both we are really fucked. Or were you too scared to search? I know I was...
- markyc 13y agoI don't even live in your wacky country and I'm scared to do that search :D
- tjbiddle 13y agoClicked HTTPS and then immediately searched 'bombs' afterwards. Now we wait.
- nkuttler 13y agoThanks for the inspiration!
- ck2 13y agoAny forum or service that allows you to post external urls for images, you just have to paste that as a image url and I guess screw everyone or pollute the database. On the enterprising side of things I guess you could sell a product with that name on Amazon and get a lot of traffic?
- bentcorner 13y ago> On the enterprising side of things I guess you could sell a product with that name on Amazon and get a lot of traffic? Now might be the time for Coleman to make a portable pressure cooker that you can take hiking with you. A "Wilderness Meal Device", if you will.
- asabjorn 13y agoThis makes current intelligence practices seem reactionary, and maybe it has fallen pray to some of the weaknesses Bruce Schneier pointed out in TSAs procedures. Have anyone seen a comparative analysis of cost towards success of targeted local investigation vs investigations prompted by big data analysis intelligence programs?
- MrKurtz 13y agoThere is no actual proof that this was due to web searches, also the picture the atlantic is using is misleading and terrible, and the article was silently changed after someone else pointed that the alleged visit wasn't actually from the FBI but from local law enforcement: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/01/new-york-police-terrorism-pressure-cooker http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/01/new-york-police... The story boils down to: "a lady claims to get a visit from the feds after googling some stuff". She herself says that: They mentioned that they do this about 100 times a week. And that 99 of those visits turn out to be nothing. I don’t know what happens on the other 1% of visits and I’m not sure I want to know what my neighbors are up to. https://medium.com/something-like-falling/2e7d13e54724 https://medium.com/something-like-falling/2e7d13e54724 This is lazy and exploitive reporting by all parties.
- rocky1138 13y agoAgreed, but the event still happened. We need to know what triggered it.
- MrKurtz 13y agoYes, someone should get to the bottom of this, but no one has, they are busy running speculative link bait.
- mratzloff 13y agoYes, I'm sure if The Guardian simply asks the US government or local law enforcement why it targeted this family they will be very forthcoming.
- reader5000 13y agoThis is the media trying to sell pageviews. We know virtually nothing about the facts of this incident, yet the media is trying to sell the story "if you google for pressure cookers you will be visited by law enforcement." That is clearly preposterous.
- sillysaurus 13y agoActually, the story is that the government knew they googled for pressure cookers and backpacks. That must mean there's a tool that someone can type your name into and get a list of everything you've searched for online.
- jggonz 13y agoUnfortunately, it looks like our law enforcement agencies won't stop harassing us for the things we do in the 'privacy' of our homes. Perhaps companies like "Google" should help them with some intelligence by making it easier to catch the 'right' guy while providing more transparency in doing so. The thought behind this is that the government will continue to collect information, and we might as well help them find the 'right' information by providing intelligent analysis of the data. This in turn would help reduce these life-ruining experiences as the ones reported in this article... I don't even like what I just said, but it's an idea. The conditions for this kind of help from the tech world, would be 1. They access bits of information without receiving a full copy from the origination source. 2. They allow congress to pass privacy laws that make sense for the country. 3. They must provide an API to your own data... after all, they do use your personal email address as the search key...... Or, they need to shut down.
- superconductor 13y agoNext time the cops are slow to respond to my noise complaint, I'll know what to do.
- chadrs 13y ago> What the hell is quinoa, they asked. Their culinary ignorance is nearly as upsetting as their disregard for citizens privacy.
- philwelch 13y agoWell this is embarrassing. I just had to google quinoa myself.
- jlgreco 13y agoEeehh, I didn't know what quinoa was either. Turns out I've eaten it on occasion, I just had no idea it was called that. It's not exactly cheeseburgers.
- frogpelt 13y agoThe fact that it's pronounced KEEN-wah makes it even more obscure when you see it written. Of course, the FBI/Police/JTTF/KGB don't have that excuse.
- mikegreen 13y agoI am skeptical of how real this is... If this really happens this often, wouldn't we be seeing reports of this all the time? "They mentioned that they do this about 100 times a week."
- s_q_b 13y agoThe specific type of explosive used the Boston bombings, the pressure cooker devices, was originally from Anwar al-Awlaki's Inspire magazine. The Feds, based on DC hearsay, may be a little embarrassed they didn't catch the association right away, so they're overreacting. Of course, the bigger story is that Googling anything shouldn't lead to a visit from domestic law enforcement, because access to search records of American citizens should be protected by the Fourth Amendment.
- dictum 13y agoIs there anything to protect access to search records of foreign citizens? What rights FISA, Patriot Act and the other laws regarding surveillance from US agencies give to non-Americans? I don't want to carp at Americans, I'm just genuinely curious of what exactly generates the distinction between Americans and non-Americans.
- s_q_b 13y agoStrictly speaking, non-citizens have no rights under the American Constitution when they're not on US soil. FISA 702 grants extensive access to collect foreign communications relating to terrorism. So from a legal standpoint, there isn't anything in the Constitution that prohibits gathering the communications of those in other nations, and it's actually specifically statutorily authorized. Also, to note quickly, this is the norm rather than the exception in Western and Western-style constitutions. The American Constitution comes up in this context more often simply because of our outsize presence on the world stage.
- rayiner 13y ago> what exactly generates the distinction between Americans and non-Americans. It is generally assumed, that a country's law applies to two groups of people: those in its territory, and citizens of the country. The Constitution is American law, therefore it applies to two groups of people: those in the U.S., and citizens of the U.S. abroad.
- dictum 13y ago
- alexhawdon 13y agoHow long before kids start playing "Google 'jihadist bomb manual' three times" instead of "say 'Bloody Mary' three times into a mirror at midnight"? Real soon, I hope!
- CurtMonash 13y agoLet's assume that this kind of aggravation is necessary to defend against terrorism in an imperfect world, which in particular has imperfect systems and government employees. Is there anything EXCEPT terrorism we'd want to have cracked down on that closely?? http://www.dbms2.com/2013/07/29/what-our-legislators-should-do-about-privacy-and-arent/ http://www.dbms2.com/2013/07/29/what-our-legislators-should-... spells out some consequences of this reasoning.
- fotoblur 13y agoWhy couldn't we simply flood the systems being tracked with more noise thus reducing signal to noise ratio. This sort of thing could be simply thwarted by a system of bots creating a large number of false positives. Any ideas?
- freshhawk 13y agoMost likely, if this became a common thing, you would have your ISP take action because you are running a "server".
- goshx 13y agoI hope they are enjoying all the porn I've been watching.
- DanI-S 13y agoThere is only one solution to this. It is fairly low tech, and it's not a popular one around here. Get involved in politics. It's tempting to believe you can enact change from your desk chair, writing smart code and angry tweets to outwit the spies and inform the people. Well, we're not there just yet. The people making the decisions that lead to these events - the most powerful people in the world - grew up in an age where, to produce change, you would get out into the streets and stir things up. Step out of your comfort zone, address the public and bring them to your side. Many people don't see the harm in a surveillance state. To prevent one, you must show the public why it is a bad thing and how they can speak out. Democracy only works when your views are heard by those with the power to bring change. Not the background rumble of a subjugated people, but the articulate demands of an informed electorate with high-profile spokespeople and popular support.
- marssaxman 13y agoEven then it doesn't really seem to work.
- loteck 13y agoOn the contrary, it seems to be working really well for the people who are using their political involvement to enact policies that many in this thread are complaining about.
- seabee 13y agoThose policies have a financial benefit for certain parties. Nobody gets rich from maintaining civil liberties. Can you think of a strong enough incentive to get this done?
- Houshalter 13y agoI don't think most people care honestly, and a few protests is not anywhere near enough to convince them. Even if you succeed, all it takes is another war/red scare/terrorist attack/whatever, to get people support whatever it takes to protect them from "the enemy".
- crististm 13y agoHey, Bing even suggests "pressure cooker bomb". Let's see...
- nakedrobot2 13y agoFuck this. I never want to live in the usa.
- declan 13y agoI just posted this on G+: A Long Island woman named Michele Catalano posts photos of M-66 explosives (that look to me like extra-large firecrackers) publicly on Facebook. A few weeks later the local cops show up and ask her husband if they have any bomb-making equipment. Instead of drawing the most likely conclusion, she instead blames this on local Long Island cops MONITORING HER GOOGLE SEARCHES: https://plus.google.com/112961607570158342254/posts/FWAVRVaN64h https://plus.google.com/112961607570158342254/posts/FWAVRVaN...
- tptacek 13y agoOf course we could expect this kind of behavior for you, as one of Hacker News' most notorious government apologists.
- sneak 13y agoAgitprop, regardless of validity, is useful if it achieves our ends. You of all people know what a powerful adversary apathy is. If lies were used to scare people into supporting these programs, they can be used to scare people into abolishing them.
- gruseom 13y agoDid you seriously just advocate intentional lying as a political device? That's a nasty road that ends in a dark place.
- harshreality 13y agoDarker than having the NSA collect a good portion of unencrypted internet traffic, and an unknown amount of traffic that was supposed to be secure in transit but might be obtained through back door deals with the service providers themselves? Darker than having a ton of laws nobody can follow and an increasingly militarized police force to enforce those laws? I'm curious, what darkness do you see in ordinary citizens lying, or drawing unfounded connections between events, to try to shift the political system and social consciousness toward more freedom? Are you one of those people who views telling the absolute truth as a categorical imperative? How much of the anti-British rhetoric of pre-revolution United States (colonies) do you view as lies? A lot of political activity, advertising, and news involves lies of some type (omission, accidental lies, misleading statements... not just answering "yes" when you know the true answer is "no").
- damon_c 13y agoWhat about the underwear bomber? Why are we allowed to search for underwear without federal scrutiny, and why are we still allowed to wear underwear on planes? Is there a line somewhere?
- Zelphyr 13y agoSeems to me a member of a terrorism "task force" wouldn't need to ask whether a rice cooker can be used to make a bomb. Note, I'm not questioning whether these men were members of such a task force. I'm questioning whether they're capable of asking non-stupid questions.
- declan 13y agoThe photo used to illustrate the Atlantic article is a stock photograph taken from the Boston bomber hunt -- and used to make their unverified report seem more incendiary. You can see it published in April by the Las Vegas Review Journal (click their right arrow on the slideshow a few times): http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/boston-bomb-suspect-hospitalized-under-heavy-guard http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/boston-bomb-suspect-hospit...
- MichaelApproved 13y agoWhat a disgustingly misleading photo. You have to read into the article to find out that the photo isn't directly related to this story. It's not even in a caption associated with the photo. Use of the extremely misleading photo makes me question the integrity of the rest of the article.
- frogpelt 13y agoWow. Does journalistic integrity also extend to pictures? The picture has NOTHING to do with the story.
- PencilAndPaper 13y agoWho cares if they showed up as a swat team or as one 'friendly' sheriff. Thats not the point. The point is that we are being surveilled in the most creepy way. Mount your ipad on your wall and start calling it a telescreen.
- datums 13y agoIs this a terrible joke ? http://bit.ly/1ctfYJ8 http://bit.ly/1ctfYJ8
- anigbrowl 13y agoTopping the article with a photo of a SWAT team without a caption is rather disingenuous on the Atlantic's part. At first I thought these were the people that showed up on her doorstep.
- abalone 13y agoTerrible reporting. It's unlikely that Google searches are the reason. 1. There's no confirmation that Google searches led to the visit, yet the article reports it as fact (headline). 2. Most if not all Google searches are encrypted over HTTPS nowadays. 3. It's local law enforcement, and while NSA info may be shared, it's unlikely that an illegal top secret NSA program targeting citizens would be shared in this manner, 100 times a week. 4. As user declan noted, the more likely cause is other information PUBLICLY SHARED ON FACEBOOK, such as this image one of them posted of high-powered fireworks: https://plus.google.com/112961607570158342254/posts/FWAVRVaN64h https://plus.google.com/112961607570158342254/posts/FWAVRVaN...
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]