Feds tell Web firms to turn over user account passwords

[dkf]

Secret demands mark escalation in Internet surveillance by the federal government through gaining access to user passwords, which are typically stored in encrypted form.

The U.S. government has demanded that major Internet companies divulge users' stored passwords, according to two industry sources familiar with these orders, which represent an escalation in surveillance techniques that has not previously been disclosed.

If the government is able to determine a person's password, which is typically stored in encrypted form, the credential could be used to log in to an account to peruse confidential correspondence or even impersonate the user. Obtaining it also would aid in deciphering encrypted devices in situations where passwords are reused.
"I've certainly seen them ask for passwords," said one Internet industry source who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We push back."

A second person who has worked at a large Silicon Valley company confirmed that it received legal requests from the federal government for stored passwords. Companies "really heavily scrutinize" these requests, the person said. "There's a lot of 'over my dead body.'"

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57595529-38/feds-tell-web-firms-to-turn-over-user-account-passwords/

[dorkzilla]

1. Well, this will stop the "I don't care if they spy, I'm not doing anything wrong" crowd

Because this may actually allow them to impersonate you!

This is just awful.

[JoePhilly]

5. Or catch an online predator.

[Katashi_itto]

6. Ahh so thats going to be the latest excuse?

[JoePhilly]

9. Next we'll hear that the government can request to see your

bank statements. GASP.

Read the article closely and see if it argues that something illegal is happening.

Notice the use of the words "demand" and "request" and how and where they are used.

The article is a weak attempt to manufacture some outrage. Nothing more.

Unless you are surprised to learn that the government might make "legal requests" (article uses that phrase too) for computer passwords during an investigation.

If the government suspects 3 individuals of a criminal conspiracy, you don't think they'll try to obtain the email and computer passwords of those being investigated?

Anyone who's been home on a rainy Saturday during a Law and Order marathon knows that happens.

[KurtNYC]

14. A TV show? Law & Order is not a documentary.

[JoePhilly]

19. I figured I'd reference a source that would keep it

simple enough for you.

[dorkzilla]

7. Oh here we go...n/t

[RKP5637]

2. WTF!!! WTF!!! WTF!!! US = United Surveillance. Of course, those saying they have

nothing to hide will come forward defending this, and they will scream WTF when it smacks them in the face for some reason ... or some error. The technology exists to pinpoint every aspect of ones life to intimate detail ... is this really the kind of world we want to live in ... There are so many ramifications to this, I'll stop here.

[Puzzledtraveller]

3. k&r

[JoePhilly]

4. They "demand" or "request" ... which is it?

Everyone should read the article and look for how these two terms are used.

[KharmaTrain]

8. More Gasoline For The Pants On Fire Crowd...

...once again, the headlines always scream louder than the reality. Peddling this stuff these days is too easy.

Cheers...

[JoePhilly]

10. YUP ... I'm shocked to learn that the police try to get IDs and Passwords

of people being investigated.

SHOCKED!

[KharmaTrain]

11. You'd Think We've Have Zero Unemployment...

...to be able to listen to everyone phone call, read words as they type them and now hack all our email. For all those billions and billions of messages, you'd need an army of millions just to sort through things. I guess my ego isn't big enough to think that my life is so important that the government is busy listening to my calls, reading my email and building up some dossier so they can come barging through my door at 3am...

[RC]

17. They use computers, searching for key words and phrases.

Only a few people need be involved. Given enough computer power, speech recognition of digitized voices is actually as good as any human and analog voices. And much faster.
People to pay the utility bills are not even needed, as the computer itself can handle the bills unaided. The same can be said for security.

[KharmaTrain]

18. If The Government...

...needs to come after me they have plenty to go from that I submit every April. I have always lived with the knowledge that one's privacy ends at one's door...when we go out we leave lots of different footprints that are gathered and datamined. Any transaction with a check or credit card is not only mined, it's sold to other companies. I'm betting your puter is loaded with tracking cookies that feed all sorts of personal browsing data. Welcome to the brave new world. My point is there's many ways for the government or the corporate world to "go after" people through personal data that's already accessible...I'm far more concerned about my information being sold and abused by corporates than I am of the government.

[RC]

22. To begin with, there are very few to no tracking cookies on any of the computers I am responsible

for

My computers are clean. It's not hard with the tools available today, plus knowing what to look for. (I got into computers in 1982, when 300 baud was the norm.)
The government has no business snooping in people's electronic data, without probable cause, period.
And as for the businesses and corporations, be picky who you do business with. With the government snooping, you don't have that choice.

[JoePhilly]

20. And now we are all Will Smith in Enemy of the State.

I love the phrase "given enough computer power" ...

Let me play ... "given enough computer power", they wouldn't need your password because they'd be able to bypass all passwords completely.

[RC]

23. You can buy enough computer power for less than $2000, retail

The programs are extra.
Don't be so obtuse.

[JoePhilly]

25. Why would the government "request" passwords if they already

have the computing power to bypass them?

[RC]

30. Here:

They, the NSA, etc., can already see and store our private data. The only reasons for wanting the passwords is to defeat any encryption they are having trouble with, and/or to impersonate the person for entrapment reasons, to shut them up.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023344812#post15

[HereSince1628]

12. Well, that limits the applicability of the 'they are only interested in metadata' arguments

People always push for things that they believe will make their jobs easier.

[RC]

15. Gee, your post seems to have shut them up for a bit.

They, the NSA, etc., can already see and store our private data. The only reasons for wanting the passwords is to defeat any encryption they are having trouble with, and/or to impersonate the person for entrapment reasons, to shut them up.

At one time this country had laws against this sort of thing, barring even the government from doing what our government is doing now, without specific warrants listing exactly what they were looking for. Not this secret, wide open warrants, casting wide nets over everyone, that we currently have. What our government is actually doing is combing through all this digital information looking for evidence against those that may be a threat to them and their total control goal.
Terrorism? Why would that not include our own government's spying on its own citizens, in violation of this country's Constitution. How much more lawless can they get? We should all hope we never find out.

[WillyT]

13. K & R !!!

[cthulu2016]

16. Worthwhile topic, but a poor article

The U.S. government has demanded that major Internet companies divulge users' stored passwords

That is vague to the point of uselessness. It could mean requesting all passwords or two instances with legitimate warrants or anything in between.

The article implies that we are talking about a sweeping program, but the nuts and bolts of the article suggest we are not talking about a sweeping program... so the whole thing ends up relying on insinuation.

I would like to she the (worthwhile) topic revisited with a higher jornalistic bar.

[JoePhilly]

21. Its designed to create outrage, not enlighten anyone.

Its no different how some have stopped using the correct phrase "data mining" and switched to the term "spying".

The first (data mining) is specific and rather boring, the second (spying) is far more ambiguous and invites the reader to use their imagination as to what's actually happening.

Same is being done in this article.

[RC]

24. They first have to spy, to get the data to mine.

[JoePhilly]

26. No, as we've discussed, they get a warrant.

But you do help prove my point ... some will take an ambigious word like "spying" and claim it means anything they want it to mean.

[RC]

29. A secret warrant, from a secret court, appointed by Justice John G. Roberts

There is little public about the operations, rules and laws they go by. The warrants are just paper for the rubber stamp.
And you defend this?

[JoePhilly]

32. The fact that you do not like how the FISA court operates, or how the judges

who sit on it are selected, does not turn "data mining", into "spying".

There are lots of things about the FISA court that could and should be improved.

But none of that turns mining meta data into spying either.

See, what I actually defend is the importance of getting the details right.

The people who are running around screaming about "spying", screaming that the 4th amendment has been "executed", screaming that we live in a "totalitarian police state" or screaming that the government is "demanding" passwords when in fact the "requests" that they make are perfectly legal, are not helping anyone get to the actual details of any of what's going on.

But that is not their goal.

Their goal is to use misleading terms and wild hyperbole to create outrage and generate eyeballs for their sites.

And it seems to be an effective tactic.

[RC]

33. So you do support the government hoovering up our private data into huge data bases, to mine later.

Good to know.

[JoePhilly]

34. Your inability to talk in anything but generalities makes

having a discussion with you rather difficult.

In that one sentence you use 3 very broad (and therefore meaningless) phrases.


They are:
1) "government hovering" ... specific data gathering technique unspecified.
2) "our private data" ... specific private data is unspecified.
3) "huge data bases" ... data held by these scary data bases unspecified.

The specifics matter. Unless one is just running in circles with their hair on fire.

[RC]

35. Apparently I am better informed than you.

! through 3 are specific for those that realize and understand what our government is doing to our electronic data.
"Hoovering" is a good descriptive term for what our government is doing to our electronic communications.
Private data, vs public data? Seems rather clear to me. Private data example: Our phone calls and E-mail. Public data example: TV/radio/web pages.
There are 5 huge data collection centers - so far. The last one is in Utah
http://nsa.gov1.info/utah-data-center/

While I have a nice head of hair, it is far for on fire.

[1StrongBlackMan]

37. As pointed out above …

The article would suggest the “Demands” represent the latter, since the “demands” are “legal requests.” But, WE … MUST … BE … OUT-RAGED … by thinly sourced reporting.

[woo me with science]

27. When I started thinking, "There's a new one every day," years ago...

I never in my life believed it would progress to this.

K&R

[Sheepshank]

28. "legal requests" and it "it could be used for..."

and yet no form or legal desgnation provided in the exerpt, for the type of legal request or under what circumstances. Yet quick to make assumptions what if could be used for.

Pretty easy to get distressed over 1/2 the info or misleading info.

Yet the courts have provided for a private corporation to have access to private and personal e-mail content, the link is provided here on DU and barely a peep out of anyone.

Trying really hard to be alarmed, but the posturing here on DU makes is pretty "meh"

[bunnies]

31. Why do they need the passwords?

If the NSA can already get any communication, from anyone, any time. Getting the password seems moot.

[Laelth]

36. Interesting comments following the article.

Thought I'd quote this one, in particular.

in the end this is just another poorly written article designed to be a honey pot for political trolls and the tinfoil crowd to turn viral and generate revenue from ads and harvesting of email addresses or plundering FB friend lists.

-Laelth