[bsharp]

Is there software for OS X that allows you to tell if someone monitors your web use? With all the new Patriot Act stuff going on, I am a little paranoid.

[sandsl]

There is no software for any platform that can tell if anyone is monitoring your connection. Your ISP can monitor your web surfing habits unless you use an anonymous proxy service.

Theres software available which can tell you if anyone is trying to hack into your computer.

...and there are services like anonymizer.com which prevent your ISP and other websites from knowing where you've been and who you are.

[ghporter]

Since your wireless network broadcasts from both your base station AND your computer, there's no way to know who may be receiving your radio signals. If you're concerned about privacy, use WEP encryption. This is not a guarantee that your traffic won't be intercepted, nor that it won't be read. Far from it; WEP can be broken fairly quickly with the right hardware and software. On the other hand, the bad guys aren't going to bother with someone who's using WEP when there are so many trusting souls who don't use any kind of protection.

If you're concerned because you're afraid that the Feds are going to bust down your door for your dirty email with your significant other, anti-government rantings, and so on, I think you should calm down. There are REAL criminals to go after, and the government doesn't have enough resources to chase after parking violators when there are drug traffickers, kiddie porners, and money launderers around.

If you're worried because you really are a terrorist, I hope they roast you over a slow fire. Really. And I hope you get caught today, too. Really.

[bsharp]

Originally posted by GHPorter:

If you're concerned because you're afraid that the Feds are going to bust down your door for your dirty email with your significant other, anti-government rantings, and so on, I think you should calm down. There are REAL criminals to go after, and the government doesn't have enough resources to chase after parking violators when there are drug traffickers, kiddie porners, and money launderers around.

I just read an article in the Atlanta Journal about a guy who was reported to the FBI for reading a magazine article on Weapons of Mass Destruction in line at a coffee shop (no joke). The FBI came to his work location and "interviewed" him because of the report. I research both sides of today's political issues online, and don't want to deal with stupid incidents, like the poor guy did in the article. Guess I just don't trust the Administration.

[ghporter]

I hate to turn political, but the administration just makes high-level policy. The twits that "interview" people for what they read, pressure librarians for who reads what, and so on, are rank and file, and only doing what they've been trained and encouraged to do their entire careers. And ones that go to these extremes-on their own-against a normal Joe who is just standing there reading a paper, are very rare.

It's when someone get to the point of taking action that the high-level policy actually kicks in, and it seems the tops at Justice are treading very lightly. Law enforcement has to be VERY careful of whom they get tips from, and they know it.

Atlanta's Journal-Constitution has a solid reputation for good, balanced reporting, and the article (I just read it) was up to their high standards. Note that the FBI's Special Agent Parris did not make anything more of the event than that his people had spoken with Mr. Shultz. The FBI has a bad reputation to overcome, you know (they missed Atta, and so on), so everything that sounds at least somewhat credible is going to look sinister to those who want to burn the Justice Department. The FBI must have standing orders to at least interview the subject of such tips. Butt covering is not always a bad thing...

I was "interviewed" by the Secret Service once. It seems my former neighbor, who had moved away a few months previously, was a Secret Service agent. Surprise! I had no idea. The agent that visited me was polite, professional, and to the point-my former neighbor was up for a renewal of his security clearance and they had to interview everyone he'd mentioned in his renewal application.

I will admit that if I hadn't had the life experience I have (and I'm well past Mr. Shultz's 25 years of age), I would have been more than a little nervous. But after years of experience with all sorts of bureaucracies, it's the folks out doing the door-to-door stuff that are who we need to watch. Most of them are doing their very best to keep the rest of us safe, and risking their own lives in the process.

And think about it in these terms: Would you have a problem if a police officer knocked on your door to tell you that your nextdoor neighbor was complaining about how much noise you were making? Would you rather they pounded on the door and wrote a ticket instead of asking you about it? Would you cooperate if a cop asked you if you'd seen an adult dragging a kid past you, with the kid kicking and screaming? (As a parent, pondering that sort of thing gives me nightmares.) Or would you rather "not get involved." Mr. Shultz has been interviewed, and doubtless been placed on a nice list of people who have been "interviewed and are of no interest."

Now, what this has to do with wireless networking? It is illegal to intentionally intercept and use radio signals not intended for you. It is not only a violation of FCC regulations, it is a violation of a recent amendment to the Computer Security Act. It takes a warrant and a court order to set up that sort of surveillance, and it's going to be very hard to get without a lot of good, well documented, external indicators. This sort of surveillance is done to get the goods on somebody that's already dug himself a nice big hole, not to "troll" for baddies. If your neighbor intercepts, breaks the encryption on, and passes on to some law enforcement agency all of your wireless traffic, you may get a visit from somebody official, but I'll bet they'll just tell you that your WEP key was too simple and the jerk next door is trying to sound like a hero for turning you in. Now, what happens to the jerk? That's another story.

I'm too long-winded, but that's my opinion.

[C.J. Moof]

Originally posted by GHPorter:

Now, what this has to do with wireless networking? It is illegal to intentionally intercept and use radio signals not intended for you.

Have you been by a Radio Shack lately? They stock a dozen products who's specific purpose is to listen to radio communications that aren't being broadcast to you.

[ghporter]

Originally posted by C.J. Moof:
Have you been by a Radio Shack lately? They stock a dozen products who's specific purpose is to listen to radio communications that aren't being broadcast to you.

That does not make it legal to do so. The supposed "legal reason" is to monitor your own systems. Yeah, right. It IS legal to monitor "open" communications, such as CB chatter, aviation traffic, and so on, but it is specifically a violation of FCC regulations to pass on anything intercepted while listening in. Any interception and decoding of traffic that has been encrypted specifically to keep it private is also a violation.