[Tfug] The NET

[Stephen Hooper]

Can the government target a specific machine, and subvert its software
to its own purposes?  Undoubtedly.  I also assume they do it fairly
regularly.

Can the government target all machines, and use them to  spy on their
owners?  I would say no.

Imagine secretly installing software, that will monitor a machine.
Further, imagine transmitting information from that machine to a
central location undiscovered by anyone (could you really do that over
the internet?).

Now imagine how much trouble you are going to.

Then imagine that if you were tasked, and given an "infinite" budget
how you would go about fulfilling either of the first two requirements
on at least 200 million people.

The government has lots of very smart people working for it, but I am
in doubt that they would be more imaginative than anyone else given
the same problem.

What I come up with is that you would need to be able to perfectly
subvert all computers (undetectably), and you would also need to
develop some means of communicating the information you are collecting
in a way that no one has yet detected.

Your scenario would also seem to imply a need to do all that in the
space of time that the evil Bushites have come to power.

Remember, the government doesn't need everyone's bank account number.
They just need the force to be able to close down the banks.   The
government doesn't need to know if you are
jewish/polish/roma/marxist/intellectual/liberal/pornographer/muslim/armenian/falun
gong, they just need the might, and the intention to make it
impossible to live a normal life if you are any of those things.

Undoubtedly, pieces of our government have the power to do those things.

 Why then would you then think that their is some grand conspiracy to
do something in the hardest possible way?  Why not choose to believe
in Occam's razor, and assume that the intended consequences of any
such conspiracy  would be to put in place in a much more direct, and
efficient manner?

You may call that double-think, but seriously,  that seems to me to be
a misunderstanding of the term in the way Orwell used it, and also
quite a lazy in thought.

In my belief there seems nothing magical, or revisionist to me; but,
quite to the contrary, seems the least magical, and most tragic of
human affairs.  Unfortunately, it also is a very common one.

If you think the conspiracy would have some other result, please let
me know.  But as far as I can tell, the only two things spying on
someones computer are sure to tell you are: financial information, or
philosophical/behavioural information.  What other possible uses could
a government have for these gleanings?
>


On 9/29/06, sitkaa at email.arizona.edu <sitkaa at email.arizona.edu> wrote:
> Watching a movie called The NET. Abit outdated, but still provides food for
> thought. In the movie, a nefarious group of hackers called the Praetorians
> writes software which acts as a trojan horse. They hack systems and cause
> problems, and are only kept out by their own software.
>
> Is it possible, can it be that this scenario is possible?
>
> There have been any number of movies and books that theorize the government has
> a program for intrusive tracking software. Especially considering the current
> administration's predilection for spying on the population at large, is it
> possible? Can they do it?, not just Carnivore, or Echelon, but the whole
> enchilada. Does the government have a single system that is able alter hack
> into and alter data in any and all computerized systems in the U.S., or for
> that matter, the world?
>
> Of course no one would ever do any such thing. And seriously doubting the
> official truth is tantamount to magic thinking. No governments would never
> actually do anything like hack computers. I no this just like I no there are
> people who ridicule any, any consideration of such conspiratorial talk. Double
> Think is the only way, isn't it?
>
> Danny Cassolaro's Promis was supposed to be able to hack any system. Just as
> conjecture, just because I know absolutely nothing about these things, except
> of course that no one would ever, never, ever attempt such an initiative, so I
> am neophyte enough to wonder if IBM's 5100 emulative capabilities could have
> helped Promis fulfill it's.
>
> Not that I believe in any of this, of course.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
> Subscription Options:
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
>