Internet Tracking

[EvilMan_89]

you may not know this but anyone who knows how can look at EVERYTHING you've done on the internet ever since you started your computer (except if you rebooted it or something like that). well....one time i read an article that this woman was suspected of killing her husband using Antifreeze as poison. the police questioned her but didn't have enough evidence to put her away. a few weeks later, they confiscated her computer and looked at what she's been doing on the Internet: she's been at websites that teach you how to kill someone with Antifreeze. so with taht, they locked her away. not only that, government has been going to colleges and universities and demanding that they fork over the names of people who download pirated media by using the Internet tracking. as a result, many students were sued (actually some colleges refused to hand that information over becuz they believed it was an invasion of privacy) so my question is where do you stand on this?

if it was legal to look at this Internet History, we can put away more criminals like phedophiles and possibly terrorists

if it wasn't legal, hundreds of thousands of people will be checked on regularly and have no privacy at all on the Internet

[White_Rook]

you may not know this but anyone who knows how can look at EVERYTHING you've done on the internet ever since you started your computer (except if you rebooted it or something like that). well....one time i read an article that this woman was suspected of killing her husband using Antifreeze as poison. the police questioned her but didn't have enough evidence to put her away. a few weeks later, they confiscated her computer and looked at what she's been doing on the Internet: she's been at websites that teach you how to kill someone with Antifreeze. so with taht, they locked her away. not only that, government has been going to colleges and universities and demanding that they fork over the names of people who download pirated media by using the Internet tracking. as a result, many students were sued (actually some colleges refused to hand that information over becuz they believed it was an invasion of privacy) so my question is where do you stand on this?

if it was legal to look at this Internet History, we can put away more criminals like phedophiles and possibly terrorists

if it wasn't legal, hundreds of thousands of people will be checked on regularly and have no privacy at all on the Internet

Well it is an invasion of privacy. Regardless it's quite creepy and almost makes me want to reformat.

[EvilMan_89]

i actually dont' know where i stand on this. i guess it MIGHT be worth it to give up my privacy if it would stop a terrorist attack but i'm not happy about them seeing me go to porn sites, lol

[Soushirei]

It wouldn't entirely help you catch pedophiles since many criminals know how to handle their internet privacy. Some remove their HDDs and destroy them after finishing something 'important' on their computers as to not leave traces or hard evidence to convict them later.

As well, there are procedures in place that are supposed to protect your internet privacy--at least from the legal standpoint. Sure, there are hackers and the like that can peep on those who aren't careful, but you were referencing authorities who took this woman's computer away and found evidence to convict her of murdering her husband. First of all, in order to be able to confiscate her computer, these authorities require a warrant to do so. And to get this warrant, there has to be enough significant evidence collected beforehand against the person in question that could render them truly suspect. This collection of evidence then has to be displayed before a judge official, by which the prosecution then has to convince the judge official of its legitimacy before the warrant is issued.

So it's not like people are randoming coming into your house and taking away your computer. There is a long process behind it before it gets to that point.

[EvilMan_89]

wow you seem to know an awful lot

[Laurence_Fox]

Only way I could see this being justified is with a warrant from a judge/DA to be able to do so. Most people keep private things on their computers: bank records, family records, job info, student portfolios, whatever else. And for someone to just go in and read those would be sort of identity theft among others.

Chances are your social security number is on those bank records. That shouldn't be shared with anyone besides you and professionals. I know I needed mine to register for school and for tax information. But aside from that, no on should know without probable cause.

If the legal officials procure a warrant to seize the hard drive of...say a suspected pedophile...fine. If they go into a college campus and seize the personal computers of students because they think the students are downloading music...I'd say it's up to the college to decide. Chances are if it's personal computers the college would say no but if they were college computers connected to the college's server then yes since it's the college's property.

I'm mixed on this issue.

Short version:
Probable cause with warrant: Yes
Suspected from rumors: No

[EvilMan_89]

i agree with that. i dont' like that i was FORCED to type that info to register for college and that peeps can just grab it

[Catch the Rain]

Internet tracking, I think, can be a great thing in helping the authorities. However I think it should only be done when there is an actual reason for it (like the others have said).

I don't think they should be allowed to take just anyone's computer though, I think that is a complete abuse of power and an invasion of rights.

Eck I hate that I sound like I am just repeating everyone -__- but it is what I think too.


Yes it is fine if there is real sound evidence and reason to go into it.

No if it is just a hunch.

[EvilMan_89]

i find it odd that they never told us the reason the police just decided to confiscate her computer 2 weeks AFTER they first brought her in

[Catch the Rain]

i find it odd that they never told us the reason the police just decided to confiscate her computer 2 weeks AFTER they first brought her in


Well they wouldn't be allowed to fully disclose all the details, they're not allowed to do that. Maybe some new evidence came to light that gave them a reason to suspect there might be evidence in her computer.

[EvilMan_89]

i also think the woman was pretty stupid for going to sites to learn how to poison someone to death with ANtifreeze, i mean it can't be TOO hard to figure it out on your own i would think

[Catch the Rain]

i also think the woman was pretty stupid for going to sites to learn how to poison someone to death with ANtifreeze, i mean it can't be TOO hard to figure it out on your own i would think

Maybe there was more to it than that, she could have been searching for other ways and come across that by accident? Afterall how many times do you end up at random sites when searching for things? :P I know I often end up with something completely different to what I was originally searching for xD

Also, she might not have been aware that they were going to take her computer and search it's history xD

I do agree though that it was rather stupid of her xD

[Repliku]

I think that computers are viable evidence, just as searching your home would be if you were suspected of a crime, such as this woman was. I'm sure they had to have a warrant issued by the judge to even go back to her place and search it so that I cannot say I am against.

As for the college issue, it is the right of the college in the end to determine if they would allow people to search their computer isp because the college does provide the students with access to the internet. When you use a college computer connection, you are viable to their standards of compliance. If you disobey it, you are bound to be in some trouble.

However, if it went into...say going into your home computer and they have no reason to suspect you of anything and then low and behold found porn on someone's computer who is under age...well, that is wrong to me. A child's computer by rights is the parent's property to investigate; not some outside force unless there is a legitimate warrant and reason. I don't see that things have gone that bad though as of this time so I hope that it continues to not get to that point. It is something to watch for though so that if something like that were to happen, we could all raise voices against such things.

I do see a need to have caution with this and it is good people know of it because as someone else pointed out, a lot of information is held on computers including links to sites they might not want people knowing of, social security numbers, bank statements, ebay accounts etc. These sorts of things hackers will try to get but as long as we don't just download questionable material and have a good virus checker for trojans and the like, we are relatively safe. Legal matters with a warrant I'm not against if it prevents catastrophe or does put some pedophile away etc.

[DrMario64]

It wouldn't entirely help you catch pedophiles since many criminals know how to handle their internet privacy. Some remove their HDDs and destroy them after finishing something 'important' on their computers as to not leave traces or hard evidence to convict them later.

As well, there are procedures in place that are supposed to protect your internet privacy--at least from the legal standpoint. Sure, there are hackers and the like that can peep on those who aren't careful, but you were referencing authorities who took this woman's computer away and found evidence to convict her of murdering her husband. First of all, in order to be able to confiscate her computer, these authorities require a warrant to do so. And to get this warrant, there has to be enough significant evidence collected beforehand against the person in question that could render them truly suspect. This collection of evidence then has to be displayed before a judge official, by which the prosecution then has to convince the judge official of its legitimacy before the warrant is issued.

So it's not like people are randoming coming into your house and taking away your computer. There is a long process behind it before it gets to that point.

Yeah, the same thing has been running through my mind. But, wouldn't this make software pirates impossible to catch as long as they don't brag about it?

[Soushirei]

Yeah, the same thing has been running through my mind. But, wouldn't this make software pirates impossible to catch as long as they don't brag about it?
I'm pretty sure there's no guarantee that they won't get caught, but it's certainly very hard to catch people who pirate if they aren't involved in anything highly criminal.

I mean, DVD ripping for example, has been going on for years and every now and then there are 'raids' by authorities who try to put their foot down on the issue and go looking for these stores in plazas, etc. But from what I can tell, during these times the stores just close their shops until the event is over, then go back to selling after. In other cases, the pirating stops for a while (stores get fined/persecuted) then the stores soon remake themselves and start again.

I'm not 100% sure on the legal loopholes that are evidently behind these things--I think it has something to due with the entire "DVD burners are meant to backup DVDs you already own" idea, even though everyone should be perfectly aware that pirating goes on anyway--but essentially yes, it is pretty hard to crack down on software/music/movie pirates if they're not involved in more incriminating affairs that can lead to a legitimate warrant.

I think a lot of the issue is that it would cost far too much money, time and effort to crack down on every single internet pirate out there. No one is willing to go out and persecute a random person who downloaded a single 3.5mb music file, because once that happens, the defense will argue that if you can do it for one person (as insignificant as it was to download one file), you should crack down on everyone else as well who pirated the same amount (and we can only imagine how many people out there who have downloaded just one music file). Such an endeavor I imagine is well in the hundreds, thousands, <.< maybe millions.

Since it's sort of a ridiculous legal venture that just simply can't be afforded, cracking down on serious offenders (those who make substantial amounts of money from pirating for example) are easier to deal with since both the number of offenders of this magnitude is smaller, and the offense is much greater, and thus more worth pursuing; quality over quantity of offenses.

In my opinion, if you're pirating and keeping yourself quiet about it, and if you're pirating for personal use (i.e. not financial gain), you're pretty safe for the most part. The only thing you're potentially affecting in the long run is the economy, but that's something you'd have to live with.

[8730]

"Those who would give up a little liberty to gain a little security deserve neither and lose both"

I think government agencies in the interest of security have forgotten about privacy and liberty. Passively checking all phone calls and e-mails (apparantly they do) for certain key words is a gross invasion of privacy. Tracking all that you do on the internet without a warrant (i.e. an acceptable reason under law) is just wrong >_>

But I agree that some level of internet tracking has to be in place, but not used as much as it is now.

[EvilMan_89]

i don't know, there are ALOT of solutions to many problems but ppl don't want to implement them becuz it would mean giving up a LITTLE bit of their rights.

[White_Rook]

Only stupid pirates brag about what they've done (i.e. the idiots behind hacking Microsoft and Nintendo for the Euro version of Halo 2 and Super Mario Galaxy).

[EvilMan_89]

Only stupid pirates brag about what they've done (i.e. the idiots behind hacking Microsoft and Nintendo for the Euro version of Halo 2 and Super Mario Galaxy).

???? i have no idea what you are talking about

[8730]

???? i have no idea what you are talking about
He means that the main way they 'track' people is they search forums and sites for people talking about illegal activities. Then they monitor certain people more closely.

Sometimes they just search for key words being used such as 'bomb', 'Islam', 'Al Queda', 'suicide' in combinations. They are then flagged by the system and investigated. Most would be false alarms (i.e. someone talking about something in the news or something) but there are the few occasions where they may come across a genuine perceived threat.

[Sasuke240]

you may not know this but anyone who knows how can look at EVERYTHING you've done on the internet ever since you started your computer (except if you rebooted it or something like that). well....one time i read an article that this woman was suspected of killing her husband using Antifreeze as poison. the police questioned her but didn't have enough evidence to put her away. a few weeks later, they confiscated her computer and looked at what she's been doing on the Internet: she's been at websites that teach you how to kill someone with Antifreeze. so with taht, they locked her away. not only that, government has been going to colleges and universities and demanding that they fork over the names of people who download pirated media by using the Internet tracking. as a result, many students were sued (actually some colleges refused to hand that information over becuz they believed it was an invasion of privacy) so my question is where do you stand on this?

if it was legal to look at this Internet History, we can put away more criminals like phedophiles and possibly terrorists

if it wasn't legal, hundreds of thousands of people will be checked on regularly and have no privacy at all on the Internet
it wasn't legal, hundreds of thousands of people will be checked on regularly and have no privacy at all on the Internet
OMG that sicks that we have no privacy where did u read that?!

[Shade Tail]

The government doesn't have any right to invade our privacy...
If George Bush started to rummage through your drawers and cabinets, how would that make you feel?

[Soushirei]

The government doesn't have any right to invade our privacy...
If George Bush started to rummage through your drawers and cabinets, how would that make you feel?
But if they had compelling evidence against you to issue a warrant; you have no choice.

This 'invasion of privacy' isn't as random as some of you are saying. It happens after a long period of time from 'behind-the-scenes' investigation.

[8730]

But if they had compelling evidence against you to issue a warrant; you have no choice.

This 'invasion of privacy' isn't as random as some of you are saying. It happens after a long period of time from 'behind-the-scenes' investigation.
In an active investigation yes that is what happens. But the way in which I mean is where they passively invade yoru privacy. They target no-one in particular, they just scan over all of the traffic looking for so-called 'hot word'. If your information communicaiton is tagged and read. I would call that an invasion of privacy without a justifiable reason under law. I go back to the quote:

"Those who would give up a little liberty to gain a little security, will deserve neither and lose both"

[Soushirei]

In an active investigation yes that is what happens. But the way in which I mean is where they passively invade yoru privacy. They target no-one in particular, they just scan over all of the traffic looking for so-called 'hot word'. If your information communicaiton is tagged and read. I would call that an invasion of privacy without a justifiable reason under law. I go back to the quote:

"Those who would give up a little liberty to gain a little security, will deserve neither and lose both"
By scanning and looking for a so-called word, they are targeting people in particular, that is, anyone who is found to possess files with this so-called 'hot word'. If local authorities decided they were going to scan traffic for '12yr old first time (add obscene actions here)' pictures or videos and your computer turned up, it shouldn't surprise anyone if they came to your door with a warrant saying your computer is under investigation because it came up in the search. There is no 'random' invasion of privacy in this aspect either.

Why do you think people rename important documents (incriminating or not)?

[EvilMan_89]

it wasn't legal, hundreds of thousands of people will be checked on regularly and have no privacy at all on the Internet
OMG that sicks that we have no privacy where did u read that?!

it's up for debate in the government. i read it online at some site for class, i can't recall the exact site tho, sry

[DarknessKingdom]

I really dont see what there is to be worried about. The law isn't going to crack down on every single person who owns a computer and check if they have illegally downloaded music or videos.

If you just happen to publicly announce that you are doing something illegial, yes ,you will prolly become a target due to your own stupidity. So if you still think you're being tracked, relax. No police are coming to search your computer unless they have good reason to do so.

[EvilMan_89]

I really dont see what there is to be worried about. The law isn't going to crack down on every single person who owns a computer and check if they have illegally downloaded music or videos.

If you just happen to publicly announce that you are doing something illegial, yes ,you will prolly become a target due to your own stupidity. So if you still think you're being tracked, relax. No police are coming to search your computer unless they have good reason to do so.
they can see more than you think......like the amount of data being sent and and received from your computer, to the type of file packets you're receiving, like gama files when you're playing an online game.

[Soushirei]

they can see more than you think......like the amount of data being sent and and received from your computer, to the type of file packets you're receiving, like gama files when you're playing an online game.
People who are trying to crack down on illegal pornography for example, will *only be able* to retrieve 'illegal pornography' if your computer comes up in the red zone from whatever 'search' is being used--and *sanctioned* by the way--at the time.

Information will be seen by authorities if it falls within the criteria for which they are searching; it's not like your entire computer is an open reservoir of information that will be seen by everyone (unless you're a victim of spyware/adware--which is a completely different issue). Pedophile investigators are not going to snoop into your social insurance, credit card transactions, etc without a warranted reason. Let's not forget that most legitimate websites (like online stores) encrypt and secure your credit card transactions when you're checking out your items.

[EvilMan_89]

that's a relief :) but if they DO find something concerning, it will be reported for obvious reasons

[The Great Gatz]

I'm fine with it. If it keeps me safe I'm happy. And I mean I don't care if people see what I was looking at. I mean I have nothing to hide from them.

[8730]

I'm fine with it. If it keeps me safe I'm happy. And I mean I don't care if people see what I was looking at. I mean I have nothing to hide from them.
But where would it stop? Would you be willing to let them see everything you buy? Everywhere you go? Again you may have nothing to hide but it is still a gross invasion of your privacy.

I again go back to my horribly overused quote:

"Those who would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both"

[Soushirei]

But where would it stop? Would you be willing to let them see everything you buy? Everywhere you go? Again you may have nothing to hide but it is still a gross invasion of your privacy.

I again go back to my horribly overused quote:

"Those who would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both"
Bunterx, please read the posts. You're dramatizing just how much the government actually gets to see. You're making this entire thing look like a futuristic movie where the government is watching how many spoonfuls of cereal you eat in the morning before you head to school/work, but that just isn't happening.

The government has strict access in terms of what exactly they get to see on your computer, and even then, these 'restricted' accesses only happen after it's warranted by the state/city, etc.

At this point, the current system of internet tracking is not a big deal.

[EvilMan_89]

Bunterx, please read the posts. You're dramatizing just how much the government actually gets to see. You're making this entire thing look like a futuristic movie where the government is watching how many spoonfuls of cereal you eat in the morning before you head to school/work, but that just isn't happening.

The government has strict access in terms of what exactly they get to see on your computer, and even then, these 'restricted' accesses only happen after it's warranted by the state/city, etc.

At this point, the current system of internet tracking is not a big deal.
he's right you know

also, in case anyone is wondering: there IS a legal/legitimate use of this TODAY. it's mostly used in comapnies to monitor their workers to make sure they arent' doing anything to hurt the company (and they get fired for looking at porn, lol). last year i worked at a company that we needed security clearance to get in (it wasn't the CIA or anything, it was just the building for the Sloman Shield) and i remember a girl getting fired because she was on AIM telling her friends what kind of work she was doing. that type of tracking IS legitimate.

just wanted to make clear that there ARE legitimate uses of it

[8730]

Bunterx, please read the posts. You're dramatizing just how much the government actually gets to see. You're making this entire thing look like a futuristic movie where the government is watching how many spoonfuls of cereal you eat in the morning before you head to school/work, but that just isn't happening.

The government has strict access in terms of what exactly they get to see on your computer, and even then, these 'restricted' accesses only happen after it's warranted by the state/city, etc.

At this point, the current system of internet tracking is not a big deal.

I didn't say that these things happen, I asked if Roxma would be willing to let the things I mentioned happen. I was speaking hypothetically. The government (any government for that matter) may never do these things or may not even be able to. I was showing that letting a smallish thing slide can lead to bigger things happening.

[P]

meh, I honestly could not care less. Provided no one decides to come and take my computer, I am fine with people knowing what I do on the net. I don't look at dodgy stuff, so I really do not see the problem.

[EvilMan_89]

that a good point, the majority of people have nothing to hide tho

[O R A N G E]

you may not know this but anyone who knows how can look at EVERYTHING you've done on the internet ever since you started your computer (except if you rebooted it or something like that). well....one time i read an article that this woman was suspected of killing her husband using Antifreeze as poison. the police questioned her but didn't have enough evidence to put her away. a few weeks later, they confiscated her computer and looked at what she's been doing on the Internet: she's been at websites that teach you how to kill someone with Antifreeze. so with taht, they locked her away. not only that, government has been going to colleges and universities and demanding that they fork over the names of people who download pirated media by using the Internet tracking. as a result, many students were sued (actually some colleges refused to hand that information over becuz they believed it was an invasion of privacy) so my question is where do you stand on this?

if it was legal to look at this Internet History, we can put away more criminals like phedophiles and possibly terrorists

if it wasn't legal, hundreds of thousands of people will be checked on regularly and have no privacy at all on the Internet

Do you have a source? I find that story about the woman hard to believe.

Information becomes more credible when you list a source. I find most of the information you present in the first paragraph incredibly unlikely. Provide a source and I'll believe you.

However, pretending for a moment that what you said was true, I find it as a violation of privacy. Things that never have been before are slowly but surely becoming watched by the government.

What privacy do we have now that is not integrated by government ears? Telephones are gone, and now internet as well? How soon will it be before our very own speech is monitored to help prevent "terrorists"?

If somebody is a terrorist, they're not going to go researching terrorism on the internet. That is ridiculous. Same as all laws passed to prevent "terrorism." Terrorists break laws anyway, so if you add a new one, they're not going to care if they have to break it.

I think the entire thing is unwise. Our personal information should not be probed.

[Dreadnought]

Well that just makes me sad... :(

[O R A N G E]

Well that just makes me sad... :(

What makes you sad? Why? I don't think anybody can tell what you're talking about.

Please try not to spam here with posts like this or else this thread will end up closed.

[Twilight's Rose]

Thats not respecting the privacy of persons. Why do you think PC's are called those way? PC as Personal Computer! I tought PC's were personal use machines. Still, its disturbing to see people checking objects that aren't properties of others.

[Xendran]

I personally have nothing to hide, and if someone tracks what im doing good for them, they can watch me talk on aim and post on KHV.

[O R A N G E]

I personally have nothing to hide, and if someone tracks what im doing good for them, they can watch me talk on aim and post on KHV.

Yes, but not everyone is like that. And even though you don't have anything to hide, it'd still be strange to have someone violating what you assumed to be private.

[JedininjaZC]

i also think the woman was pretty stupid for going to sites to learn how to poison someone to death with ANtifreeze, i mean it can't be TOO hard to figure it out on your own i would think

some people look up very random stuff, I think privacy should not bbe invaded on the internet, it's like ease droping! u only get half of the conversation.

[O R A N G E]

some people look up very random stuff, I think privacy should not bbe invaded on the internet, it's like ease droping! u only get half of the conversation.

Do you mean eavesdropping?

And I don't think random stuff is what people care about. They would get THE ENTIRE conversation, not half, becuase they'd be looking at exactly what you were doing.

I agree with you, however, in saying you only get half the conversation.

[SӓiḺØr N.Ø.I.$.E]

Yes, but not everyone is like that. And even though you don't have anything to hide, it'd still be strange to have someone violating what you assumed to be private.


OMG I LOVE THE SONG DARK BLUE ...orange u rock! xD

back on topic

i find that internet tapping is just as bad as phone tapping

these things shoundt be done