FBI Seized Anonymizer Server
from the protected-anonymity? dept
The US State Department keeps saying it wants to support a free and open internet, and to build systems that protect dissedents and reformers who are speaking out. But it seems that they can't get the message through to the rest of the US government. Apparently the FBI has seized a server used by various people to anonymize their emails, because it was also used as part of a bomb threat:On Wednesday, April 18, at approximately 16:00 Eastern Time, U.S. Federal authorities removed a server from a colocation facility shared by Riseup Networks and May First/People Link in New York City. The seized server was operated by the European Counter Network (“ECN”), the oldest independent internet service provider in Europe, who, among many other things, provided an anonymous remailer service, Mixmaster, that was the target of an FBI investigation into the bomb threats against the University of Pittsburgh.As the announcement from Riseup states, the FBI (as is all too typical) is "using a sledgehammer approach," killing off this important service that many used, just because one person abused it.
“The company running the facility has confirmed that the server was removed in conjunction with a search warrant issued at the request of the FBI,” said May First/People Link director Jamie McClelland. “The server seizure is not only an attack against us, but an attack against all users of the Internet who depend on anonymous communication.”
Disrupted in this seizure were academics, artists, historians, feminist groups, gay rights groups, community centers, documentation and software archives and free speech groups. The server included the mailing list “cyber rights” (the oldest discussion list in Italy to discuss this topic), a Mexican migrant solidarity group, and other groups working to support indigenous groups and workers in Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa. In total, over 300 email accounts, between 50-80 email lists, and several other websites have been taken off the Internet by this action. None are alleged to be involved in the anonymous bomb threats. The seized machine did not contain any riseup email accounts, lists, or user data. Rather, the data belonged to ECN.
“We sympathize with the University of Pittsburgh community who have had to deal with this frightening disruption for weeks. We oppose such threatening actions. However, taking this server won’t stop these bomb threats. The only effect it has is to also disrupt e-mail and websites for thousands of unrelated people,” continues Mr. Theriot-Orr. “Furthermore, the network of anonymous remailers that exists is not harmed by taking this machine. So we cannot help but wonder why such drastic action was taken when authorities knew that the server contained no useful information that would help in their investigation.”Why is it that law enforcement almost never seems to think through the actual consequences of actions like these?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: fbi, internet freedom, seizure, state department
Companies: european counter network, may first/people link, mixmaster, riseup networks
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
God, you're such a whiny bitch.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They don't care!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
...the AC whined, bitchily
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Because they simply don't care and there's no accountability for them to be worried about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Or is that too mature an approach for you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The wrong question, perhaps...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an "Anonymizer" server.
What was seized was a server running a Mixmaster anonymous remailer.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Or is that too complex of an analogy for you?
(yea, it probably is)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Google
"anonymous email"
About 283,000 results (0.14 seconds)
0.00035335689045936394% decrease.
or
anonymous email
About 57,600,000 results (0.22 seconds) 0.000001736111111111111% decrease.
My tax dollars hard at work! I'm so proud they are being spent on actions with zero benefit..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I'm more angry though at the government and their over reaction. When a fly gets in your house do you grab a damn shovel and start swinging it around your kitchen? That is exactly the kind of grace and intelligence our government keeps showing.
The governments reaction to a lot of online crime does more damage than the criminal they are going after. It makes no sense when chasing a fleeing criminal do you shut down the airline he happened to use?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Which would be pointless because there is no way of stopping that short of destroying the internet.
rather than getting mad at law enforcement.
When law enforcement causes a lot of collateral damage whilst failing to actually enforce the laws then it is sensible to complain.
You are the immature one - since you clearlyu haven't thought your comment through.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Dial back the stupidity next time and add more vitriol if you want to win troll points.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The conclusion I have come to once again? I will still fight for your right to say things such as that, but along with that I also fight for the right to say, Please do us all a favor and go get sterilized. None of us want any more of your genes contaminating the gene pool.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
/s
Or maybe we should rightly get angry at the people who abuse their authority to shut down perfectly legal and useful tools that happen to get abused by a small number of people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Ultimately, it requires someone with functioning braincells to actually come up with ways to *catch* bad guys rather than just document their behavior.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hmmm, the thought's a bit out of place, but it's a bit how 'terrorist' operate... do something to make people fearful/angry or disrupt infrastructure ... ultimately folks start disliking/distrusting their government...
Yah, far fetched.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: They don't care!
Fat Bellied Ignoramuses
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The majority of the public (>35) tend to believe the same.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
well....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Me?
They just wrecked the best possible chance of actually catching some perps because they got a badge and they're gonna use it?
Oh and fuck everybody else. SOP, move along. Free this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Form of speech doesn't mean an event actually occurred.
If the University had the money, they should have hired more security to keep people safe. That seems to be the duty of a university such as this.
However, in a day with rising tuition costs, as well as textbooks, it seems the University may be spending it's money on other things outside of physical safety and security of its campus. This seems like a negligent oversight by the university of Pittsburgh.
I suggest that the school administration becomes more vigilant and visit with the students that pay their salaries instead of locking themselves up in an office all day. This takes more time but also in the future the students who are successful will feel like contributing to the school's alumni association.
Instead, they decide to call the FBI. Hah. My neighbor works for the FBI as well. He's a director and oversees investigations in labor issues.
I can call the FBI too, or walk over to his house. Want his phone number? Maybe you have a hot tip for him or something.
Outsorvin
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wait I've got it!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Wait I've got it!!
The Patriot Act is also probably why Secret Service agents are in hot water.
The company that has the most to gain in an internet society is AT&T. With their Dallas-based headquarters near a number of federal agencies, they currently collect and market your communications to whomever.
In fact, I was at Home Depot the other day and HomeDepot has wifi by AT&T now also. But it's filtered. Even Google results are filtered according to "administrator's privelidge". Which is fine, but still, it's a lot of URLs and data that can be sold to third parties now that AT&T doesn't have much outside of it's brand.
If AT&T keeps this up, I imagine they'll be broken up soon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Because, they don't care about our rights.
Pretty simple - for if they did care, they wouldn't do these things.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The 'NO LAW' part... what part of that don't people understand?
It doesn't say anything about having to list your name. It simply says 'no law'.
See Government can't follow even this simple law - explain again why the people should follow the laws then?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Perhaps that is because laws don't work that way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I doubt that they "knew" anything
Thing is, they just assume that there are logs. Just as an Anonymous Coward post here probably leaves a record in a log, I am sure that they figure anonymous mailers keep logs. The police may not think things through, but they won't believe that there are no logs until they search the disk. Lots of legitimate search warrants find nothing, but cause disruption. This is just normal operating mode.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
And by "you people" he means Mexican migrants and indigenous workers in Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about computer software. For the company Anonymizer, Inc., see Anonymizer (company).
An anonymizer or an anonymous proxy is a tool that attempts to make activity on the Internet untraceable. It is a proxy server computer that acts as an intermediary and privacy shield between a client computer and the rest of the Internet. It accesses the Internet on the user's behalf, protecting personal information by hiding the client computer's identifying information.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
Anonymizer: something that anonymizes.
anonymizes3rd person singular present of a·non·y·mize (Verb)
Verb:
Make anonymous.
Remove identifying particulars from (test results) for statistical or other purposes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
It is one of the reasons I am happy our laws don't include freedom to disappear. We are afforded the opportunity to speak our mind and everyone else is afforded the opportunity to laugh derisively at what we have to say.
Stay classy TAM, stay classy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Again I'm unsure, so if you can find a link supporting or disproving this, I'd appreciate it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The real point...
They will show stock footage of a server, or the actual server being carted out.
There will be a voice over saying how this server was used in the Bomb threats and it has now been sized as the authorities are closing in.
This was a photo op.
The talking heads/pundits screamed ZOMG when someone "hacked" the CIA and Congress websites.
The average citizen is concerned by the hype... they took down the CIA?!
Tech types saw the story for what it was...Someone defaced a poster put up by the CIA.
Obligatory XKCD - https://xkcd.com/932/
This also will be used to add to the climate of the internet being an EVIL thing used for EVIL and we have to have the "right" people making sure bad people don't use it wrongly. And people will lap it up much like they accepted ball cupping,tit fondling to get on a fucking airplane.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Now, there are exceptions. For example; you can't send a bomb threat to a school. But, you weren't asking about anonymous bomb threats, you were asking about anonymous communications in general. That we do have the right to. Not just a legal right, but an inalienable right.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
So first off, we have an explicit federal crime which prohibits the use of false names, no names, etc... but only when being attempted to commit mail fraud.
Although implicit, it does imply the right to remain anonymous as long as mail fraud is not being committed.
While the person in the article is certainly a threat to the others around him, and I don't have an issue with the FBI attempting to find him, I do have an issue with the disruption of the day to day affairs of quite a few people who were doing nothing wrong.
URL: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1341
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Form of speech doesn't mean an event actually occurred.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The difference here is that the criminal isn't in the same building, much less the same room.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Seems like your approach is extremely immature.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Wait I've got it!!
What? Again?
Didn't they learn their lesson LAST time?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
There's no need for a law for them...
After all, the word "right" is in there.
Which means that you're entitled to it regardless of what people think or say, so long as you do not endanger the lives of others while using those self same rights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Because there are no consequences - for them, that is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The FBI..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Well, no, we can't find one. But since you're concerned about people communicating anonymously and wish to see it stopped, perhaps we should start with you. asl?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sledgehammer approach
[ link to this | view in thread ]
FBI seizing server
and apparently another unibomber type. See how one bad apple spoils the lot? Get it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Me?
I would guess that this guy will get caught with old school policing techniques. Clearly this person has a major axe to grind, it is unlikely that manifests only in these email threats.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
If AT&T offered specific service to allow people who make prank phone calls or death threats a way to be able to make those calls and make them entirely untraceable, you can bet they would have the FBI in there quick like a bunny.
Your analogy doesn't work because AT&T isn't helping people hide out.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
Registering a common usage term as a brand name does not remove it from common usage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
deception
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
FBI, im waiting?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
I wonder how you manage to get away with using Mixmaster in this day and age. Doesn't some company that makes food processing machines own that? :-)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.
That is how US trademark law works.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
When a knock comes at the door from an uncle
One fine day the faces on the bills that have been circulating shall strike before they go and I am not sure if people will consider how far a forefather we Americans identify with. I am not sure if people know their vbery people nor their family story enough to care about the blood that spilled of every heritage. At least there was someone before another and I am certainly clueless to know WHo was first and had the right when rights were given up or rightfully lost.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I'm not sure it was less dangerous to things than a spade, now that I think about it...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
"Think"....With what?
You're assuming that Government Agents have the required equipment installed to be able to think.
[ link to this | view in thread ]