Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 1 votes

IRS to read your email, Facebook, Twitter


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#31    SpiritWalker7

SpiritWalker7

    Seeker

  • Member
  • 2,953 posts
  • Joined:20 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:NC

  • "When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do." -William Blake

Posted 16 April 2013 - 11:39 PM

That's fine by me. I make sure I have nothing that can be used against me online.


#32    justcalmebubba

justcalmebubba

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 229 posts
  • Joined:16 Feb 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:frankston texas

  • there are many things that bump along in the nite but there are sum of us that bump back

Posted 17 April 2013 - 12:13 AM

3 things a person can truely count on death taxes and your gov lieing to you


#33    lightly

lightly

    metaphysical therapist

  • Member
  • 6,066 posts
  • Joined:01 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Michigan U.S.A.

  • "The future ain't what it used to be"
    Yogi Berra

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:46 AM

Court Rules Email Protected by Fourth Amendment

DECEMBER 14, 2010 BY PAUL OHM


Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that the contents of the messages in an email inbox hosted on a provider’s servers are protected by the Fourth Amendment, even though the messages are accessible to an email provider. As the court puts it, “[t]he government may not compel a commercial ISP to turn over the contents of a subscriber’s emails without first obtaining a warrant based on probable cause.”
https://freedom-to-t...urth-amendment/



Important:  The above may contain errors, inaccuracies, omissions, and other limitations.

#34    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,555 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:57 AM

Thanks Lightly but I beat you to it when ninja told me my life belongs to the government. He could have found that with a simple search too but that'd wreck his world knowing we have rights to privacy.

Edit: don't mistake that for me thinking the Feds follow the rules...

Edited by -Mr_Fess-, 17 April 2013 - 01:58 AM.

Posted Image

#35    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,863 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 17 April 2013 - 03:09 AM

View PostAliveInDeath7, on 16 April 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:

That's fine by me. I make sure I have nothing that can be used against me online.
Your personal information is in many databases.   I'd be a wee bit more guarded than to use the word "nothing" and believe it.

What if something could be used against others online?  Is that really fine with you just because it's not you personally?   What if it happened to a loved one, a best friend, a husband, the father of your children, etc.

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#36    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,047 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 18 April 2013 - 03:05 AM

View PostAsteroidX, on 16 April 2013 - 02:36 AM, said:

excuse me ? If you get onto my computer and bypass my security to read my emails you have committed the crime of hacking.

Only if your "email" never actually goes into the internet. You do understand how the internet works, right?

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#37    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,863 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 18 April 2013 - 07:00 PM

View Postninjadude, on 18 April 2013 - 03:05 AM, said:

Only if your "email" never actually goes into the internet. You do understand how the internet works, right?
Unfair.  We exist on the internet the same way we do offline, we have a real address we're connecting to the internet from.  If this isn't akin to digital private property it probably should be.    If it's written in pencil and paper and we're carrying it to the taxman under our jackets we deserve the same degree of privacy as someone who files with Turbotax or HRBlock or with their tax preparer via email.  

Could you imagine if some individual stole your information from an email and used it against you?   Should there be no defense against this?

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#38    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,047 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 19 April 2013 - 03:06 AM

View PostYamato, on 18 April 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

Unfair.  We exist on the internet the same way we do offline, we have a real address we're connecting to the internet from.  If this isn't akin to digital private property it probably should be. If it's written in pencil and paper and we're carrying it to the taxman under our jackets we deserve the same degree of privacy as someone who files with Turbotax or HRBlock or with their tax preparer via email.  

Could you imagine if some individual stole your information from an email and used it against you?   Should there be no defense against this?

Are you seriously comparing Internet protocol and routers (run by private enterprise)  to the US Postal Service? Unless your data is encrypted, it stored and forwarded through possibly many ISP's.

And it's already basic legal tenets that you have zero expectation of privacy when sending email from a company that you work for.

All of you are forgetting the CARRIER. Your email doesn't appear in your inbox by magic. Your mail doesn't appear in your mailbox by magic.

Quote

The TCP/IP protocol suite , which is very widely used today, was developed under the sponsorship of the Department of Defense. Despite that, there are a number of serious security flaws inherent in the protocols. Some of these flaws exist because hosts rely on IP source address for authentication; the Berkeley ``r-utilities'' are a notable example. Others exist because network control mechanisms, and in particular routing protocols, have minimal or non-existent authentication.
http://insecure.org/stf/tcpip_smb.txt

Quote

When TCP/IP was designed in the early 1980's, security was not a primary concern. However, in the years since their inception, the lack of security in the TCP/IP protocols has become more of a problem. The widespread use and availability of the TCP/IP protocol suite has exposed its weaknesses. Presented here are a number of well-known vulnerabilities of both TCP/IP itself, and of some protocols commonly used along with TCP/IP (such as DNS).
http://www.linuxsecu...p-security.html

Quote

Internet service providers in many countries are legally required (e.g. CALEA in the U.S.) to allow law enforcement and intelligence agencies to monitor some or all of the information transmitted by the ISP. Modern ISPs integrate a wide array of surveillance and packet sniffing equipment into their networks, which then feeds the data to law-enforcement/intelligence networks and software such as DCSNet in the United States, or SORM in Russia, allowing them to monitor Internet traffic in real time
https://en.wikipedia...ervice_provider

Quote

The captured information is decoded from raw digital form into a human-readable format that permits users of the protocol analyzer to easily review the exchanged information. Protocol analyzers vary in their abilities to display data in multiple views, automatically detect errors, determine the root causes of errors, generate timing diagrams, reconstruct TCP and UDP data streams, et
https://en.wikipedia.../Packet_sniffer

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#39    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,863 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 April 2013 - 05:32 AM

View Postninjadude, on 19 April 2013 - 03:06 AM, said:

Are you seriously comparing Internet protocol and routers (run by private enterprise)  to the US Postal Service? Unless your data is encrypted, it stored and forwarded through possibly many ISP's.

And it's already basic legal tenets that you have zero expectation of privacy when sending email from a company that you work for.

All of you are forgetting the CARRIER. Your email doesn't appear in your inbox by magic. Your mail doesn't appear in your mailbox by magic.

http://insecure.org/stf/tcpip_smb.txt

http://www.linuxsecu...p-security.html

https://en.wikipedia...ervice_provider

https://en.wikipedia.../Packet_sniffer
It doesn't get to my inbox by magic and it doesn't get to my tax preparer's office by magic either.  In order to convince me, you must find differences not more similarities.  

Because privacy is grossly forsaken on the internet doesn't mean it should be nor must continue to be.  A reasonable expectation of privacy should be provided by the technology.   If the 1s and 0s across the wire are encrypted by their source then that should be the fence that even statist interpretations admit is meaningful in a 4th Amendment case.  Obama has an expectation of privacy in his electronic communications   Given how the technology works, it's as the previous poster alluded to.   If we're going to have transparency, when do people get to read the Fed's emails?  

You also changed the subject to law enforcement agencies which the IRS is not, so reminding me that crime is fought on the internet doesn't help me accept standards so low that there's no reasonable expectation of privacy from anyone.

The internet is a lean mean free market machine right now and it's interested in cost efficiency.

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#40    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,363 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 19 April 2013 - 05:41 AM

Things that one might post in entire innocence can be taken out of context or rearranged or taken selectively.  Trial attorneys do this sort of thing all the time (they get the stuff during "discovery") in order to confuse the jury and put the other side on the defensive.

The IRS and other law enforcement agencies often have some "bad guy" they are after, but can't quite "get," so they resort to this sort of thing.

Consequently, it doesn't quite do to just dismiss it all and say one has nothing to worry about if one is truly innocent.  To be sure, innocence is better than being in a situation of trying to hide guilt, and you are more likely to come out okay, but there is no guarantee.


#41    Dan'O

Dan'O

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 656 posts
  • Joined:24 Aug 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 April 2013 - 05:43 AM

Use encryption whenever possible.


#42    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,363 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 19 April 2013 - 06:20 AM

Well until you get a subpoena asking for the decription password.


#43    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,047 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 20 April 2013 - 02:35 AM

View PostYamato, on 19 April 2013 - 05:32 AM, said:

.  Obama has an expectation of privacy in his electronic communications

No he doesn't and neither should you. You have to actually use secure/encrypted options. It doesn't happen unless you actually use it.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#44    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,863 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 April 2013 - 06:35 AM

View Postninjadude, on 20 April 2013 - 02:35 AM, said:

No he doesn't and neither should you. You have to actually use secure/encrypted options. It doesn't happen unless you actually use it.
He doesn't?   How do you know?  I don't know of anyone who secretly compromises Obama's electronic communications and posts them online somewhere; you'll have to refer me to where this ever happens.

Neither "should" I?  Why not?

I don't "have to" do anything.   It has nothing to do with the subject either way.  If emails are being secretly read by hackers, this is a legal matter not a technological one.  Your grand political philosophy of "the government can do whatever it wants and you have to deal with it" airs itself openly as usual.  If ISPs release email records of a suspect in the act of fighting crime, that's a different issue for a different subject not relevant to my post you replied to.  You've been wrong with everything you've responded with so far.   Your initial attempt at a relevant reply "the technology makes everyone's emails vulnerable to everyone" wasn't relevant when everyone's property is vulnerable no matter what form it happens to take.  I can put an extra lock on my door.  My place can still be broken into by criminals or government agents.   Just because one doesn't live on an island fortress their papers and effects must still be granted protection under the law.

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#45    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,555 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 20 April 2013 - 12:21 PM

Couldn't we say the technology behind snail mail leaves all of our mail vulnerable to be seen or read by everyone. It's a federal offense to open someone else's mail and look at it. What is it about a sealed envelope that makes it so much more sacred than a password protected email box? Much of the information in today's emails is as sensitive as traditional mail.

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users