Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Do you think its ok for goverment to be allowed to check our email?

85 replies to this topic
lucid121
  • lucid121

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2013

#1

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:50 PM

I use encryption, so it doesn't affect me at all. But don't you feel its wrong for them to be doing this. Majority of the citizens don't even know what the goverments gets up to.

  • Tyler likes this

Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007

#2

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:51 PM

I use encryption, so it doesn't affect me at all. But don't you feel its wrong for them to be doing this. Majority of the citizens don't even know what the goverments gets up to.

Is there something in your e-mails that you don't want to be seen?


El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#3

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:53 PM

 

I use encryption, so it doesn't affect me at all. But don't you feel its wrong for them to be doing this. Majority of the citizens don't even know what the goverments gets up to.

Is there something in your e-mails that you don't want to be seen?

 

Beyond the point really - private correspondence should be just that, so unless you're under suspicion of something that warrants surveillance, it shouldn't be filled through by anyone.


El_Diablo
  • El_Diablo

    "The_Devil" ™

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2002
  • Mars

#4

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:55 PM

we've already sort of discussed this in the Debates forum.
 

but I don't know why anyone would be worried about the government reading your emai if you've got nothing to hide.
they'll never read your email anyway unless you show up as Red Flag in their system by emailing people who are known terrorists :lol:

  • Irviding likes this

RoadRunner71
  • RoadRunner71

    Try to Run, Try to Hide

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2012
  • None

#5

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:55 PM Edited by RoadRunner71, 07 September 2013 - 11:57 PM.

Unless the Gov. has a warrant, no. This overcontrol is getting too far.

I don't have anything to hide, but I have my right to privacy and I don't like anyone to be checking my private things.
  • AndrewDeSanta likes this

El_Diablo
  • El_Diablo

    "The_Devil" ™

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2002
  • Mars

#6

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:00 AM

they're not going to check your private things unless you throw up a Red Flag.

 

they don't sit around checking random people's email.

  • •ΏF‘ρρ4L‘ƒ£?• likes this

Zak.
  • Zak.

    slippi

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Mar 2004

#7

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:01 AM Edited by Zak., 08 September 2013 - 12:04 AM.

I use encryption, so it doesn't affect me at all.

 

That actually doesn't necessarily matter anymore:

http://www.commondre...ne/2013/09/07-0

 

EXCERPT FROM LINK - According to Thursday's reports, based on documents leaked by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, the NSA (as well as the GCHQ) have used "covert measures" to control and manipulate international encryption standards, largely through building "industry relationships" with many technology companies and internet service providers, which in turn deploy 'backdoor' entry points into their email, online banking, and other such online databases and introduce weaknesses into their encryption standards to the benefit of NSA surveillance.

  • Typhus likes this

Shenmue18
  • Shenmue18

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Unknown

#8

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:11 AM Edited by Shenmue18, 08 September 2013 - 12:12 AM.

That's really f*cked up, it's not because I have stuff in my e-mails that I want to hide, or any criminal activity that I've been doing via email. It's the fact that the government cares so little about the privacy of their citizens that they'd completely ignore your rights and read your emails without a warrant or any evidence that suggest you're up to something bad. The NSA really needs to step back and bit a let people have some damn privacy. What's next? Surveillance cameras in our homes? 


El_Diablo
  • El_Diablo

    "The_Devil" ™

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2002
  • Mars

#9

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:25 AM

it has nothing to do with privacy and everything to do with national security.

 

the government needs the ABILITY to check your email and phone records if you throw up a red flag.

it doesn't mean they sit around reading your emails for fun.

 

but they require the ability to tap in.

especially in this day and age.

  • Irviding likes this

018361
  • 018361

    Human

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2010
  • None

#10

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:53 AM

I don't think it's okay in any way. It has already been abused before by people who have used it to spy on people that they have relationships with. I don't have anything to hide either, well nothing besides my private affairs that I don't want some perv in the gov't ranks to have  24/7 access to. Like I have said before the notion of taking away our rights to stop those who wish to take away our rights is completely ludicrous. They have succeeded in making people scared so they they would allow this type of stuff to happen. They may not have done it intentionally, but it was an effect of their war propaganda. I just don't want to risk the chance of this happening because if they were to be planning something bad they could use your info as slander to stop you from doing something such as running for office or some other political related crap. 
 

  • aritrabose likes this

Zak.
  • Zak.

    slippi

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Mar 2004

#11

Posted 08 September 2013 - 01:34 AM

 What's next? Surveillance cameras in our homes? 

 

6C7512049-new-image-consoles.blocks_desk

 

 

 

 

but I don't know why anyone would be worried about the government reading your emai if you've got nothing to hide.

 

Sure, the US government right now doesn't seem at all able to use the average guy's bullsh*t emails, but if things like this continue, and the constitution does for some reason one day get thrown out the door by a true despot, this system of surveillance is completely at their whim to string together false accusations against you. In fact, there have been multiple cases recently of harmless facebook posts that have led to the police showing up at their doors and arresting them for ridiculous charges. Don't be passive about this. It's the easy way out.


El_Diablo
  • El_Diablo

    "The_Devil" ™

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2002
  • Mars

#12

Posted 08 September 2013 - 01:42 AM

 

Sure, the US government right now doesn't seem at all able to use the average guy's bullsh*t emails, but if things like this continue, and the constitution does for some reason one day get thrown out the door by a true despot, this system of surveillance is completely at their whim to string together false accusations against you. In fact, there have been multiple cases recently of harmless facebook posts that have led to the police showing up at their doors and arresting them for ridiculous charges. Don't be passive about this. It's the easy way out.

 

that's just a 'slippery slope' argument.

it doesn't really hold any water.

 

if we're going to debate hypotheticals, then anything is bad when abused. obviously.

the government already has MANY MANY powers that could be horrible when abused. we could sit here all day long and worry about how they could absue any one of them. but that gets us nowhere.

 

assuming the government DIDN'T abuse the power to read emails, then technically there's nothing wrong with goverment having that power. it makes perfect sense within the purview of national security in the era of instant / global communications.

  • Irviding likes this

WhatsStrength
  • WhatsStrength

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2012
  • United-States

#13

Posted 08 September 2013 - 02:28 AM

They already do it anyway. If there were laws forbidding it, they'd still do it. Just don't be doing anything illegal through e-mail and you'll be fine. 


Irviding
  • Irviding

    No bed crew

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2008
  • United-States

#14

Posted 08 September 2013 - 02:48 AM

it has nothing to do with privacy and everything to do with national security.

 

the government needs the ABILITY to check your email and phone records if you throw up a red flag.

it doesn't mean they sit around reading your emails for fun.

 

but they require the ability to tap in.

especially in this day and age.

This pretty much. There are not employees that work for the government reading every email sent. They have access to your email and if a red flag is thown up they will get a FISA warrant to pull the full emails.


sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#15

Posted 08 September 2013 - 08:25 AM

I think el_diablo and Ivirding hit the nail on the head when he talks about capability and requirement. I'm opposed on principle to the mass employment of techniques that can obtain unencrypted email data en masse, but that doesn't mean that I oppose the permitting of the government to access email data if there's a requirement to do so.

The other primary issue is that, despite there being a great deal of public opinion around the issue which highlights people are unhappy with the apparent invasions of privacy conducted- particularly by the three-letter agencies but to a lesser extent by police forces too- they rather neglect the fact that their personal quibbles are rather contradicted by the fact they willingly signed up for a service which places limitations on their expectation of privacy. I find it strange that people can maintain this perspective when they've effectively consented for the capability to be in place for their communications to be viewed if a requirement were to arise.

People need to start realising that you don't have an expectation of privacy on the internet. You're using a service provided by a third party (email), over a service provided by a third party (ISP), over hardware provided by a third party (infrastructure provider). You effectively have a contract with all of these parties which outlines permissible use, and by using their services you agree to their terms and conditions. Most willingly provide access points for lawful interception.

Oh, and lucid212, most email providers have the capability for encryption. It's just some are more secure than others. Worth noting that most of the encrypted email providers can still hand plaintext copies of emails over as they've usually got the capability to decrypt data stored on their servers regardless. Encryption is only as good as the platform on which it is employed- the strongest cryptographic standards in the world are utterly useless if their implementation is flawed.

lucid121
  • lucid121

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2013

#16

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:30 PM

 

I use encryption, so it doesn't affect me at all. But don't you feel its wrong for them to be doing this. Majority of the citizens don't even know what the goverments gets up to.

Is there something in your e-mails that you don't want to be seen?

 

Pornhub premium account.

  • •ΏF‘ρρ4L‘ƒ£?• likes this

Slave Boy
  • Slave Boy

    Big Homie

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 May 2008
  • Finland

#17

Posted 09 September 2013 - 08:52 AM

No. It's a crime to read other peoples' mail, physical or digital.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#18

Posted 09 September 2013 - 02:55 PM

No. It's a crime to read other peoples' mail, physical or digital.


That would make sense if you actually had ownership over your email. Which thanks to the technicalities of most mail server providers' ToCs, you don't.

orbitalraindrops
  • orbitalraindrops

    fa$$ot

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2012
  • None

#19

Posted 10 September 2013 - 02:55 PM Edited by orbitalraindrops, 10 September 2013 - 02:58 PM.

There's a difference between privacy and covering your tracks. Your recent posts, especially those revolving around onion sites are worrying.


sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#20

Posted 10 September 2013 - 08:58 PM

To be honest everything is a balance in the trinity between accessibility, security and obscurity. If you're worried about the interception of communications data, switching to a protocol like the layered TLS onion routing used in Tor doesn't actually add a great deal of security, and in fact probably makes it more likely that your communications are going to be intercepted. That much proximity to illegal activity combined with the relatively small number of individual nodes in the Tor network means that you're much likely to end up spaffing identifying information for people to see in the long run than you are just using conventional TLS/SSL which no-one really cares about.

If you want to browse the internet truly privately, do it from a bootable CD running something like Tails that isn't exploitable. You'll still be identifiable to your ISP ect, but there's no physical record of your activities inside your property as nothing is stored- and you could do it from a public library or other place where you are effectively unmonitored. If you want to communicate privately, use encrypted USB drives with cypher block chaining and delivery the three passwords using different mediums. There are always solutions that are basically insurmountable to defeat, but they tend to suffer severely in terms of accessibility.

Original Light
  • Original Light

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Jun 2011

#21

Posted 10 September 2013 - 09:29 PM Edited by Original Light, 10 September 2013 - 09:31 PM.

I've never posted in this section from what I recall, but this subject really interests me.

 

Just a thought-

 

Would certain words in an email trigger an alarm? For example, the words "bomb" and "detonate" both posted in the same message would set off an alarm, resulting in them checking it, or at least going on a list for review?

 

Original Light


Tyler
  • Tyler

    The light in august

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2009
  • Unknown

#22

Posted 10 September 2013 - 09:51 PM

they're not going to check your private things unless you throw up a Red Flag.

 

they don't sit around checking random people's email.

 

Who decides what a red flag is? Is it the same entity with the ability to check your email? 


El_Diablo
  • El_Diablo

    "The_Devil" ™

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2002
  • Mars

#23

Posted 11 September 2013 - 01:53 AM

Who decides what a red flag is? Is it the same entity with the ability to check your email? 

depends.

 

sometime an independent court / panel, sometimes the NSA itself, sometimes Congress.


Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • United-Nations

#24

Posted 11 September 2013 - 02:05 AM Edited by Melchior, 11 September 2013 - 02:10 AM.

 

No. It's a crime to read other peoples' mail, physical or digital.


That would make sense if you actually had ownership over your email. Which thanks to the technicalities of most mail server providers' ToCs, you don't.

 

I think it is implicitly suggested that we do have ownership over our emails. Even if they explicitly say "everything you send to your friends is ours and we can do as we please with it" somewhere in their 10,000 word contract, people do view their emails as being exactly like physical mail, only sent over the internet. There's dissonance between how the product is viewed by the public and how it's treated legally and that is unacceptable. 

 

I mean, if I were to start a package delivery company called "Melchior Express" and purported myself as being exactly like Fed Ex, only I  stipulate in the fine print that I own every package and letter you send and can hand them over to third parties as I see fit, I'd be in a lot of trouble and no doubt there's something in the common law that can be used to bust me.

 

You can blame public ignorance all you like, but I think it has more to do with how the product (emale) purports itself: people have an understanding that "mail" is private and confidential (open your room mate's letters and see how that goes down) and email is still treated as "mail, but digital." We need to secure our privacy on the internet.

 

So no, I don't think the government should be able to read our emails. I don't think our service providers should be able to read our emails. I think only the sender and recipient should be able to view an email. I'm old fashioned like that.


El_Diablo
  • El_Diablo

    "The_Devil" ™

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2002
  • Mars

#25

Posted 12 September 2013 - 05:17 PM Edited by El_Diablo, 12 September 2013 - 09:41 PM.


I think it is implicitly suggested that we do have ownership over our emails.

 

no.

no it's not.

 

Sivis is 100% correct; you do not technically own your emails. there is nothing technically private about them.

according to the law, email does not fall within the guarantee of privacy.

 

it doesn't matter if people "view their emails as being exactly like physical mail" because it's not.

anyone who feels like their email is private hasn't actually read their Terms of Service agreement like they were supposed to when they signed up ;)

  • Irviding likes this

RockStarNiko
  • RockStarNiko

    Foot Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2012

#26

Posted 12 September 2013 - 11:35 PM Edited by RockStarNiko, 12 September 2013 - 11:39 PM.

I don't see what the problem is

 

The only issue people seem to have is a right to privacy

 

But why is privacy such a big deal?

 

Especially in this day and age where you have so many halfwits posting all kinds of information on social media sites

 

So, what is so important about your privacy?

 

You want to keep your aunt nelly's secret recipe for cookies a secret or something?

 

They should have the right to view anything online in order to help fight crime

 

 

Also, OP, I am more concerned as to why you feel the need to use encrypted emails than I am about government looking at people's emails


Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • United-Nations

#27

Posted 13 September 2013 - 04:38 AM Edited by Melchior, 13 September 2013 - 04:38 AM.

it doesn't matter if people "view their emails as being exactly like physical mail" because it's not.

It obviously matters. The fact that people have an expectation of privacy means they should be entitled to it to some degree, especially if that expectation largely comes from the email providers themselves. "E-mail" suggests "mail, but digital" and the word "mail" has a connotation of privacy (again, open your room mate's, hell open your girlfriend's letters and see how that goes down).

 

Basically, purporting your service as an analogue to another service, while stipulating in the fine print that it's actually completely different, is not a legitimate business practise. Think about a parallel to this issue: if I started a taxi service that actually just dropped you off somewhere random at the triple the cost of a normal taxi, and tricked people into using it by pretending to be an ordinary taxi, people wouldn't stand for it.


sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#28

Posted 13 September 2013 - 06:54 AM

In a sense you're right, but the issue is that the service is only analogous if you ignore the actual terms and conditions. In the UK many of those ToCs wouldn't stand up under legal scrutiny but in the US, if you say something in a contract it's basically binding come what may, and several court cases there have concurred that ticking a box having read absolutely nothing of the terms and conditions is overt and legally binding agreement. Which isn't to say that people are happy about it- they aren't- but currently there is nothing legally wrong with these practices and it will only be with the weight of popular opinion that these companies stop taking advantage of the users in such a way- if ever. Until then, it's going to be a legal feeding frenzy for anyone who has the access/capability.
  • Irviding likes this

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • United-Nations

#29

Posted 13 September 2013 - 08:55 AM

I'd be surprised if it was legal in the US. Again, try to imagine a non-digital service using contracts in such a way. I think it's probable that the legal system for whatever reason sees fit to treat the internet differently.


Kyle.
  • Kyle.

    Hello everyone! Name name is Kyle.

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Jan 2009
  • Italy

#30

Posted 13 September 2013 - 10:05 AM

This whole NSA crap is stupid. Not only does it invade our human rights to privacy but also it's a perversion, especially if they use "webcams" to watch us...they should put themselves on the pervs list in that case..

 

Utterly disgraceful that we are being treated like animals in a maximum state pen or some BS.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users