FISA Redux Again: The Slippery Slope Leads Down A Rabbit Hole

Five days ago, in the post "FISA Redux: The Slippery Slope Becomes A Mine Shaft", we discussed the new set of domestic spying protocols that the Bush Administration is determined to entrench into law and practice before leaving office. The measures would:

…make it easier for state and local police to collect intelligence about Americans, share the sensitive data with federal agencies and retain it for at least 10 years. … would apply to any of the nation’s 18,000 state and local police agencies.

Criminal intelligence data starts with sources as basic as public records and the Internet, but also includes law enforcement databases, confidential and undercover sources, and active surveillance.

…also would allow criminal intelligence assessments to be shared outside designated channels … It turns police officers into spies on behalf of the federal government.

As if that wasn’t enough fun for one post, we also learned that Attorney General Mukasey

…would release new guidelines within weeks to streamline and unify FBI investigations of criminal law enforcement matters and national security threats.

Well, that didn’t take long. Guess what; they’re here. It is amazing how when it comes to protecting the rights and privacy of American citizens, the health and stability of the environment, the education of our children, and the care and compassion to military veterans, the Bush Administration produces nothing but bad faith delay, obstruction and, often, outright refusal to act. They are imminently capable, however, of moving with breathtaking alacrity when they sense the opportunity to seize unheard of domestic police state powers that undercut the Constitution, solely by Administrative fiat, and that fundamentally alter the way the American public exists in relation to it’s government in terms of their privacy and, in an existential sense, if not physical, their right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Here, courtesy of the New York Times, is the new joy the Attorney General is announcing to "protect yer freedums":

A Justice Department plan would loosen restrictions on the Federal Bureau of Investigation to allow agents to open a national security or criminal investigation against someone without any clear basis for suspicion, Democratic lawmakers briefed on the details said Wednesday.

The senators said the new guidelines would allow the F.B.I. to open an investigation of an American, conduct surveillance, pry into private records and take other investigative steps “without any basis for suspicion.” The plan “might permit an innocent American to be subjected to such intrusive surveillance based in part on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, or on protected First Amendment activities,” the letter said. It was signed by Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island. (emphasis added)

At first blush, you are tempted to think "this is the same thing we talked about last week, what’s new here?" But there is a significant difference. The provisions last week took the controls off of domestic intelligence gathering, created new roles for intelligence agencies and authorized greater coordination and sharing of intelligence information with state and local police agencies. The instant provisions remove the controls from the FBI/DOJ end of things, a separate, but critical distinction. Taken in total, however, the two announced sets of changes to domestic spying and surveillance rules create an unrestrained and unbound free for all for any and all governmental interests whether federal, state, local, or some combination thereof, to collect and retain effectively any and all information imaginable on American citizens.

There is a higher authority, all knowing and all powerful, that knows everything about everyone; and it isn’t god, it’s the government. That, however, is not even the most frightening aspect of this scheme. No, the worst part would appear to be that, from this mass database of everything, the government will be free to cherry pick unrelated, and indeed even innocuous, bits and pieces of information on an individual or group of individuals and cobble it together to imply suspicion sufficient to target said individuals and/or groups for formal criminal and national security investigations. This makes "Big Brother" look like an infant stepchild.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Not any more. Nope, the Fourth Amendment is so "pre 9/11". How quaint and archaic. 9/11 changed that. 9/11 changed everything. There was only one way for terrorism, whether it be from al Qaida, Iran, Iraq, or timbuktu, to destroy this country, and that was if we, ourselves, let the grip of abject terror and fear consume us from within and destroy our basic Constitutional ethic. The craven neocon authoritarians of the Cheney/Bush Administration have seen to it that just that result occurred. Heckuva job. Mission accomplished.

We have met the enemy, and it is us.

image_print
  1. plunger says:

    There was only one way for terrorism, whether it be from al Qaida, Iran, Iraq, or timbuktu, to destroy this country, and that was if we, ourselves, let the grip of abject terror and fear consume us from within and destroy our basic Constitutional ethic.

    We have met the enemy, and it is us.

    My take:

    “Every pretext for war is created by those with the capacity to profit from it.”

    Plunger

    http://proliberty.com/observer/20000906.htm

    From the September 2000 Idaho Observer:

    RAND analyst admits Defense Secretary fits profile of domestic terrorist?

    “Astute observation” begs question: “Who are the real terrorists?”

    The Department of Defense’s definition of terrorism is:

    “The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or try to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious or ideological.”

    “All acts of terrorism are politically motivated,”

    “Why would Cohen, who has access to all chemical/biological weapons intelligence data, including that disseminated by RAND, scare the public with the imminence of a chemical/biological threat? Is he not mirroring the intent of ‘terrorists’ to leave a specific impression on a gullible public,” asked Don Harkins of The Idaho Observer.

    Chalk gave a thoughtful and lengthy answer to Harkins’ question. Chalk explained that Cohen’s public announcement was undoubtedly prompted by lobbyists who used the Clinton cabinet member as political leverage to fund their anti-terrorism programs and research.

    “Earlier today Dr. Hoffman stated that ‘all terrorist acts are politically motivated.’ What you just described to me is that Cohen’s threat of imminent chemical or biological attack was politically motivated. How, then, is Defense Secretary Cohen’s behavior different from what you guys have described as that of a domestic terrorist?” Harkins asked.

    With a smile that seemed to say, “touchet,” Chalk said, “Your observation is very astute.”

    We have met the enemy, and it is us.

    No more giving credence to the “foreign terrorist” conspiracy theory. The terrorists are within. 9/11 was invented right here, and branded by none other than Karl Rove, The Terrorist. He picked the date for its relationship to the number Americans were conditioned to dial in the event of an emergency.

    Consult Occam’s Razor:

    Occam’s razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or “shaving off”, those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory.

    Who is most likely to have controlled all of the events and their aftermath since Bush took office? Those with the most control.

    • jackie says:

      Plunger,
      I know you don’t always get the ‘kindest’ feedback from here, but I wanted to say that I see where/to whom you are going and the truth is definitely down that road.. Nice job…
      Many Thanks

      • plunger says:

        Thank you for that, Jackie. I’m just trying to get my country back…same as everyone else here.

        Have you reviewed this compilation?

        It was assembled by a blogger named WinterPatriot, who went to the effort to create the site as a repository of many of my previously posted observations, which he valued enough to save.

        I don’t fault anyone for pushing back against my theories, as most are too painful to admit, even for me. That’s why I try my best to back them up with facts and links – in the hope that someone will prove me wrong with opposing facts and links.

        Sadly, it rarely if ever happens.

  2. yonodeler says:

    Now “most likely to” profiling, not restricted to ethnic profiling, can proliferate. The FBI can design a profile, have software written or customized to flag personal data fitting it, and start plugging people in—no suspicion of crime necessary.

  3. PetePierce says:

    This scheme would go further even than Bmaz has even said. It’s a bonanza for software developers who want to develop profiling schemes and you betcha–there are an army of them lined up to DOJ and alphabet agencies you never dreamed of that exist to profile you–that’s right you. Never got a parking ticket living your pristine squeaky clean life? Well that’s about to change and the paradigm shift is going to be writ large.

    Have fun devising D.C. Circuit schemes for HJC to tie Rove, Miers, and Bolten’s panties in a wad? Well soon you can be in your own reality show devising schemes for your criminal appeal in your local circuit. How’s that for Mukasey’s new reality game?

    To aid the cherrypicking, vendors are pushing all manner of software that create profiles out of the data, in conjunction with the Biometric profiles that are being generated at Clarksburg Virginia in the new billion dollar facility the size of several football fields. Yes–that one, the one with the 20% accuracy when the profiles are gathered in poor light–or translated to a word everyone can identify, even the ones who don’t understand that the word catharsis means “fuck you–she’s staying and trying to get the nomination”.

    As the article says, given this erratic data base, and software that creates profile based on the erratic data base, then this system can pick out you and create a profile that implicates you.

    We have put 1/100 people in some form of shit hole prison in the US. If you are an individual like the MSM who knows nothing about them and think they’re country clubs, then you are as naive as they are. That’d mean also you don’t realize that when they make a call outside, they line up while people are yelling “get the fuck off the phone you mother fucker” in their ear and in the phone the entire time and paying about $12 for a call you pay a few cents for–about 1500% of what you pay for a long distance call if you don’t have a plan that allows you to call free in the US (while being wiretapped of course).

    As I’ve maintained many times, this country is succeeding in reucing that number from 1/100 to about 1/10 and is on the fast track to do so.

    Orwell would be floored, because the tame little affair he described is a tea party compared to what we have now.

    Every so-called law enforcement website has a tip line. Niehgbor’s dog barking too loud? Did they grow something that annoys you because it pokes through a fence? You think they kept you from joining that country club?

    Go on line and screw ‘em. Make up something and anonymously report ‘em. You can get ‘em profiled, buried in legal expenses in a heart beat. Law organizations could start doing this to whole populations of people to increase their businesses by getting bots to report large segments of the populations.

    The possibilities are endless. And of course “I am a Russian expert–that’s why we have the clusterfuck in Georgia right now” Condi is in Iraq trying to negotiate an open ended $15 billion a month fiasco/debacle or is it a catharsis?–you see the word CATHARSIS has come to mean just about anything you like for the next two weeks.

    Today’s Shoutout:

    Justice Souter for screwing the Democratic Senatorial Candidate by preventing him from getting on the ballot in Maine thus paving the way for the Moron Sisters Collins and Snowe to cruise to staying in office.

    UPDATE: Souter refuses to order ballot access for Democrat in Maine

    Who says he isn’t making GHWB happy about his appointment?

    • bobschacht says:

      This scheme would go further even than Bmaz has even said. It’s a bonanza for software developers who want to develop profiling schemes and you betcha–there are an army of them lined up to DOJ and alphabet agencies you never dreamed of that exist to profile you–that’s right you.

      Well, the Internet collects “cookies” on us to “help” us. In fact, that kind of data mining is a basic characteristic of the Google, isn’t it?

      At least on the Internet, you can disable cookies. Unfortunately, you can’t do that in our Brave New World.

      “Minority Report” indeed. What began with furriners will soon be applied here at home: people will be arrested (”detained” is the genteel word) who are suspected of planning something illegal. Unfortunately this is not snark.

      Bob in HI

  4. darms says:

    What will they do when they realize how expensive it is to keep people locked up? Halliburton/KBR may get a cut but that’s money not going for weapons systems or investment bank bailouts…

    • plunger says:

      What will they do when they realize how expensive it is to keep people locked up? Halliburton/KBR may get a cut but that’s money not going for weapons systems or investment bank bailouts…

      Expensive? Not in the new world order.

      KBR already got the contract and built the camps:

      http://www.marketwatch.com/New…..-858254656

      An open field, a guard tower and some razor wire…think “Stalag 13.”

      http://www.ringnebula.com/proj…..tory14.htm

      Here’s Cheney’s own “Swift Luck Greens:

      CYPRUS SHOSHONE COAL CORPORATION
      HANNA WY 82327

      Latitude: 41.92 Longitude: -106.521944

      http://209.157.64.201/focus/f-…..7403/posts

      • darms says:

        Plunger, yeah I know about the camps (drove through far west TX in 2002, a scary place indeed when the main ‘feature’ of many small towns is the barbed wire prison camp within) but for now, they still have to guard prisoners, they still have to feed prisoners and these things cost money. As manufacturing has all been outsourced, it’s not as if the prisoners can be used to make money. If you were Cheney, what would you do?

        • plunger says:

          it’s not as if the prisoners can be used to make money. If you were Cheney, what would you do?

          Sadly, the prisoners can be used to make money, or at least earn their own keep. Forced Labor Prison Camps are legal here now. “Swift Luck Greens” includes coal mining, grain production, and other types of work including the manufacture of furniture and shoes.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C…..or_Program

          Wikipedia:

          Civilian Inmate Labor Program –

          The Civilian Inmate Labor Program is a program of the United States Army provided by Army Regulation 210-35[1]. The regulation, first drafted in 1997 and went under a “rapid act revision” in January 2005, provides policy for the creation of labor programs and prison camps on Army installations. The labor would be provided by persons under the supervision of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

          Prison camps

          The regulation also sets forth policy for the creation of prison camps on Army installations. These would be used to keep inmates of the labor programs resident on the installations.

          In January 2006, Kellogg, Brown and Root reported that they had received a contract from the Department of Homeland Security to expand ICE DRO facilities “in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs.”[3] A February news article comments that the “new programs” mentioned could include the Civilian Inmate Labour Program.[4] ICE has “joint federal facilities” with the Federal Bureau of Prisons.[5]

          • darms says:

            Plunger, I know we’re off in the weeds here but giving tools to inmates is the same as giving weapons to inmates. Your wiki link is to a program for minimum and low security inmates. Do you really think people locked up w/o trial for an indefinite sentence will be ‘minimum and low security’? If it was me in there I’d have nothing to lose…
            Actually I’m hinting at a ’solution’ to this particular ‘problem’ of excessive costs for incarceration and no, t’aint nothin’ new.

            • PetePierce says:

              We have had a prison industrial complex in this country for years that is vibrant and expanding. There have been kickbacks galore between DOJ’s 2nd largest agency, BOP and various enterprises like Brown and Root or KBR.

              Congress only gets concerned about it when, like Ted Stevens now in the “land of the three Sullivans” Judge Emmet, his Williams and Connolly attorney, Brendan, and another Sullivan connected to the trial Stevens has already started a circus.

              Once imprisoned they regret all the “tough ass” stances they took with regards to the justice system and prisoners having no earthly idea what they were putting in place.

              H/T Ted Stevens one of the meanest most vindictive sumbitches in Congress–an epicenter of mean vindictive sumbitches. At Age 84, he’ll get to see what prison medicine is all about and learn that BOP hacks love to go after VIPs.

              Uncle Ted lost his change of venue motion, potential jurors were asked if they read The Hill when many of them read nothing at all, got on a radio show where he challenged viewers to bring it and come after him, and has just asked the Senate Ethics committee for your money to pay for his defense fund. I’m sure you can send checks to him for his terrific service over the years for your causes.

              Stevens has voted for every single torture bill in the Senate, every bill to prolong prison terms, every bill to not equalize crack and powder, and for the Clinton–that’s right the Bill Clinton propelled 1996 Act that dramatically foreclosed on prison appeals.

              Soon Stevens will be sweeping the floors if he’s out of bed in some rat shit BOP hospital facility.

  5. stryder says:

    “Now at midnight all the agents
    And the superhuman crew
    Come out and round up everyone
    That knows more than they do
    Then they bring them to the factory
    Where the heart-attack machine
    Is strapped across their shoulders
    And then the kerosene
    Is brought down from the castles
    By insurance men who go
    Check to see that nobody is escaping
    To Desolation Row”

  6. plunger says:

    Darms:

    In the newly emerging scheme, where your government, your banker, your mortgage lender and your tax collector are one in the same, the concept of “Debtor’s Prison” must be considered. Now that Treasury Secretary Paulson has all but assured that Freddie and Fannie will become “Sammie” (as in your government becoming the mortgage lender of last resort), those millions of citizens contemplating “walking away” from their mortgages may have a new reality to consider…working off their debts, whether in the military, on a public infrastructure crew, or in a forced labor prison camp.

    With an epidemic of homelessness at hand, we would be foolish to imagine that they did not plan for the aftermath, given how hard the FED Chairman worked to create the housing bubble and personal debt bubble in the first place.

  7. darms says:

    WRT to Ted Stevens, here’s a comment I wrote back in July & posted several places including here. Never got any response, however –

    When Sen. Ted called for an early trial in September, I smelled a rat. Given all the people involved who have plead guilty, why would the Senator want an early trial unless the fix was in already? If he’s acquitted, not only does it paint the investigation of this corruption as a mere ‘witch hunt’, it means his behaviour will never be subject to an honest, competent investigation. Shades of Kay Bailey Hutchinson in the 90’s. Please note that while Tom DeLay still maintains his ‘innocence’, he & his minions are in no hurry to go to trial anytime soon. Plus has anyone seen a real investigation of Abramhoff? McCain’s on the committee that controls the BIA and I’ve read they’re sitting on many thousands of pages of Abramhoff-related records that they’re doing absolutely nothing with save running out the clock on the SOL.

    IMHO the only reason this country can afford to lock up 1/100 of its citizens is that most of these people are locked up for definite terms and know that on a definite day (if not sooner) they will be released. Take that away w/indefinite detentions w/o charges or trials and suddenly all your formerly ‘minimum and low security’ inmates will cease to be so. Takes a lot of $$$ to keep someone in a super-max. My guess is that the ultimate ’solution’ to this ‘problem’ would need to be a ‘final’ one.

    • PetePierce says:

      Getting in as many licks for the Totlaitarian State and DOJ aka “Dear Leader” as possible during the 4.5 months they have left to have their way with a clueless House and Senate.

  8. spoonful says:

    Your description of the cherry picking of a massive database of information sounds just like what the FBI has done with Bruce Ivins and the anthrax case. Now, McCain is up in the national polls . . . let’s see, there’s a little house on a stretch of coast in Brazil that I bet can still be bought pretty well . . .

  9. MadDog says:

    Totally OT, but of high interest here: Conyers Releases Letters Initiating Investigation into Alleged Iraq Intelligence Forgeries

    House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) today released a series of letters initiating the Judiciary Committee’s review into allegations that senior administration officials approved the creation of fabricated documents to deceive the American public about the nuclear threat posed by Iraq in 2003. Committee contacted a number of administration and intelligence officials seeking their cooperation with its review. The correspondence is linked below.

    Richer letter
    Tenet letter
    Maguire letter
    Krongard letter
    Hanna letter – Link at Conyer’s site to this is currently broken there.
    Libby letter

  10. PetePierce says:

    What is also really significant about these protocols Mukasey is ready to hatch into action is that Congress could just say “No.” They could legislate to prevent this coup which is taking place with an equally indifferent yawn from MSM and from Congress.

    Congress is not going to do diddly jack squat about this. There will be the usual Feingold speeches but nothing will stop it.

    • bmaz says:

      That is right. Congress, through legislation, could “occupy” the the critical areas of law through which this scheme will be effected by the Administration, and preclude them from doing so. Much harder to do that after the fact though; and, once again, Bushco has taken advantage of the calendar to pull this wool over eyes while Congress is on vacation and distracted by the party conventions and fall elections. It is a sick and unethical ploy that the Bushies never miss an opportunity to pull. And it works every time thanks to the feckless Democratic Leadersheep. Remember what was going on exactly a year ago?

      • PetePierce says:

        Good point, and good link to Selise’s timeline which is well done and probably before I ran into EW/Empty Wheel.

        And the tack I’m taking here, Bmaz isn’t a breathless, hysterical, alarmist tone that everytime an agency, particularly DOJ, floats a trial baloon or possible initiative that Congress (as if they would) has to vigilantly pre-empt them, but as you know as well as anyone, this particular DOJ and these particular measures aren’t guarden variety agency floating. They are huge civilian surveillance and more than that 4th amendment end runs in the final analysis, that are vague and secret but what we know is scary enough, and they are pointing towards building biometric profiles based on who knows what, and starting investigations based on the profiles when there wasn’t a scintilla of probable cause to start the investigations. It’s to me about as close to a surveillance nation as we have gotten, considering the FISA and other technologies now up and running.

    • bmaz says:

      A lot of both; it is the “institutionalizing” that is the problem. They are making it legal and the norm. Not just amending the Constitution, but effectively repealing on of the most sacred parts of it through mere administrative rule and regulation manipulation.

  11. readerOfTeaLeaves says:

    Yup. Investment banks? No oversight.
    Us citizens — soon, they’ll be calling us in for colonoscopies at our local fire stations to make sure they have ALL the data they need. (Evidently, our assholes aren’t yet as big as theirs are, but oh, well… sad for us.)

    Need more evidence about that ’lack of oversight’ part…? The WaPo actually did some reporting today, and it speaks volumes about what a ’helluva job’ these clowns have done ignoring oil speculators:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..id=topnews

    No information about secret Energy Task Forces, oil speculators, or WH emails.
    HUGE databases about our height, weight, cognitive functions, eye dilation, fingerprints, DNA, and border crossings.

    ”Minority Report” anyone…?

  12. Mary says:

    I just don’t have time to say all the things I want to on this topic bmaz, but thank you for this post. It goes to the heart of what has been bothering me so much about so many of the decisions made, from Patriot Act language to the FISA amendments now, to the NSLs and on and on.

    Maybe I can put together a coherent comment later, but if not, know that the lack of comment is bc I have too much to say, not too little.

  13. Mary says:

    18 – btw, not only can I not get any of the letters to open either here or at Conyers site, but if I follow the link to Conyers site I get frozen there. Not sure why and it may all be on my end.

  14. CTuttle says:

    bmaz, interestingly, MI-5 dissembles the stereotypes for terrorists… A fascinating read…

    MI5 has concluded that there is no easy way to identify those who become involved in terrorism in Britain, according to a classified internal research document on radicalisation seen by the Guardian.

    The sophisticated analysis, based on hundreds of case studies by the security service, says there is no single pathway to violent extremism.

    It concludes that it is not possible to draw up a typical profile of the “British terrorist” as most are “demographically unremarkable” and simply reflect the communities in which they live.

    The “restricted” MI5 report takes apart many of the common stereotypes about those involved in British terrorism.

  15. Hmmm says:

    Can’t say we weren’t warned:

    If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. The loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or imagined, from abroad.

    – James Madison

  16. Mary says:

    Since you mention MI-5:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2…..eed=uknews

    MI5 criticised for role in case of torture, rendition and secrecy

    MI5 participated in the unlawful interrogation of a British resident now held in Guantánamo Bay, the high court found yesterday in a judgment raising serious questions about the conduct of Britain’s security and intelligence agencies.

    One MI5 officer was so concerned about incriminating himself that he initially declined to answer questions from the judges even in private, the judgment reveals. . .
    . . .the officer, Witness B, was questioned about alleged war crimes under the international criminal court act, including torture. The full evidence surrounding Witness B’s evidence, and the judges’ findings, remain secret.

    They pretty much add to the evidence supporting his story about Morocco. The court finds he was held illegally in Pakistan and that MI-5 knew and provided more than passive assistance to the US nationals who were involved in the illegal detention.

    To the point, the Judges have said there is no way Binyam Mohammed can have a fair trial before the miltiary commission without his lawyers getting access to information that the British gov is withholding:

    Mohamed is due to be tried for terrorist offences before a US military commission in Guantánamo Bay as a result of confessions he says were extracted by torture. He faces the death penalty if found guilty. Without information held by the British government, he could not have a fair trial “as he will not be able to try to establish the only answer he has to the confessions – namely that they were involuntary and abstracted from him by wrongful treatment”, the judges said.

    emph added.

    Millband says he has given info to the US, but the US won’t release it and Millband says he won’t either. Because this time, the US’s Prince W is playing the Saudi role of Bandahar. If Millband discloses info, the US will be very angry and it will ‘harm’ the intelligence relationship between England and the US.

    I’m guessing he hasn’t read Suskind’s book about all the lies the Brits got from the US anyway – or how we punked them on the Pakistani arrest that sent them into a national security tailspin trying to roll up their surveillance suspects.

    The court, btw, has said, **we’ll make the decision on what will be released, Mr. Millband. Don’t you worry your pretty little head **

    From the article:

    Clive Stafford Smith, director of Reprieve, the legal rights group also defending Mohamed, said: “The British government may have been accused of being Bush’s poodle, but the British courts remain bulldogs when it comes to human rights.”

  17. yonodeler says:

    Most web users won’t go as far as I do to limit exposure of personal data; some go further, but most of them know a lot more about IT than I do, I assume. While none of us who uses telecommunications and the Internet will entirely avoid leaving information trails—our ISPs and telephone service providers accumulate much information about activities of every validly identified customer, as I hope we all know—there are several measures that can reduce the amount of information web sites can accumulate. I have found this EFF white paper, Six Tips to Protect Your Search Privacy, to be helpful. Even for those who would not consider going as far as using anonymizing software, EFF provides useful facts that many experienced users don’t know about or haven’t really thought about; such as this one from the white paper:

    … if you have a dynamic IP address on a broadband connection, you will need to turn your modem off regularly to make the address change. The best way to do this is to turn your modem off when you finish with your computer for the day, and leave it off overnight.

    If you are connecting directly as a very large majority of web users are, not using proxy, how can making your IP address change make a difference, if each IP address logged from your visits to a site can be traced to the ISP that can identify you? Well, at least a visited site not in possession of your identity is not able to collate all your visits and related activity there to one IP address if you do not always visit using the same one. Cookie preferences also make a difference as to how much web sites can learn about us. We don’t have to make everything easy for the grabbers of our personal data.

    Using Tor or other anonymizing software or changing proxy, and some other protective measures, can result in being misunderstood and even in being denied access to some web sites. Some admins even seem resentful, but they should realize that it’s not all about them. A user may consider a site’s owners and admins to have straightforward intentions, a sound privacy policy, and impeccable ethics, but may be concerned about security vulnerabilities of the site, or may be concerned about the consequences of compulsory legal process and of government requests and demands for information. How many site and service owners would contest to the utmost broad government requests or demands (such as National Security Letters) for personal information and information that can be readily collated to personal files, and what would their chances of prevailing be?

    • yonodeler says:

      I should add that it may not be necessary to leave the broadband modem turned off for several hours to cause an IP address change. Even leaving it turned off for a short while may be enough. Trial and error and IP address checking are all I can suggest.