I hope the NSA agents enjoy p*rn and basketball websites, cause that's where my cookies will take them. AP News via Fox News NSA Caught Placing Cookies on Web Visitors' Computers Thursday, December 29, 2005 Officials: Bush Authorized NSA Eavesdropping in U.S. NEW YORK — The National Security Agency's Internet site has been placing files on visitors' computers that can track their Web surfing activity despite strict federal rules banning most of them. These files, known as "cookies," disappeared after a privacy activist complained and The Associated Press made inquiries this week, and agency officials acknowledged Wednesday they had made a mistake. Nonetheless, the issue raises questions about privacy at a spy agency already on the defensive amid reports of a secretive eavesdropping program in the United States. "Considering the surveillance power the NSA has, cookies are not exactly a major concern," said Ari Schwartz, associate director at the Center for Democracy and Technology, a privacy advocacy group in Washington, D.C. "But it does show a general lack of understanding about privacy rules when they are not even following the government's very basic rules for Web privacy." Until Tuesday, the NSA site created two cookie files that do not expire until 2035 — likely beyond the life of any computer in use today. Don Weber, an NSA spokesman, said in a statement Wednesday that the cookie use resulted from a recent software upgrade. Normally, the site uses temporary, permissible cookies that are automatically deleted when users close their Web browsers, he said, but the software in use shipped with persistent cookies already on. "After being tipped to the issue, we immediately disabled the cookies," he said. Cookies are widely used at commercial Web sites and can make Internet browsing more convenient by letting sites remember user preferences. For instance, visitors would not have to repeatedly enter passwords at sites that require them. But privacy advocates complain that cookies can also track Web surfing, even if no personal information is actually collected. In a 2003 memo, the White House's Office of Management and Budget prohibits federal agencies from using persistent cookies — those that aren't automatically deleted right away — unless there is a "compelling need." A senior official must sign off on any such use, and an agency that uses them must disclose and detail their use in its privacy policy. Peter Swire, a Clinton administration official who had drafted an earlier version of the cookie guidelines, said clear notice is a must, and "vague assertions of national security, such as exist in the NSA policy, are not sufficient." Daniel Brandt, a privacy activist who discovered the NSA cookies, said mistakes happen, "but in any case, it's illegal. The [guideline] doesn't say anything about doing it accidentally." The Bush administration has come under fire recently over reports it authorized the NSA to secretly spy on e-mail and phone calls without court orders. Since The New York Times disclosed the domestic spying program earlier this month, President Bush has stressed that his executive order allowing the eavesdropping was limited to people with known links to Al Qaeda. But on its Web site Friday, the Times reported that the NSA, with help from American telecommunications companies, obtained broader access to streams of domestic and international communications. The NSA's cookie use is unrelated, and Weber said it was strictly to improve the surfing experience "and not to collect personal user data." Richard M. Smith, a security consultant in Cambridge, Mass., questions whether persistent cookies would even be of much use to the NSA. They are great for news and other sites with repeat visitors, he said, but the NSA's site does not appear to have enough fresh content to warrant more than occasional visits. The government first issued strict rules on cookies in 2000 after disclosures that the White House drug policy office had used the technology to track computer users viewing its online anti-drug advertising. Even a year later, a congressional study found 300 cookies still on the Web sites of 23 agencies. In 2002, the CIA removed cookies it had inadvertently placed at one of its sites after Brandt called it to the agency's attention.
Daniel Brandt is the guy who gave Wikipedia a black eye and haunts Google to this day. He's also 7 ft. tall and roundhouses Chuck Norris on the interweb. Cookies suck. For those who still haven't changed their Hosts file, here's the link to do it. The instructions are simple, and it prevents lurking ad agencies from monitoring you.
OMG, time to batten down the hatches and prepare for ARMAGEDDON!! What's next? A car that tracks how many miles we drive??? A government agency that tracks how much money we make?? A phone book that tracks where we live and what our number is??? A library that tracks who checks out what books?? Our lives will be ruined!
again just like in the other thread when you thought the issue was spying but it was not.. it was the lack of warrants/court orders for domestic spying between americans.. this thread is not about tracking in general.. its about how, who, and what is going to be done with the information.. NSA already admitted it was illegal so they turned it off.. do you even have a spine to stand up for your rights? good thing there's a constitution to do it.. you're so afraid that you're willing to give up everything to this neo facist govt..
It is quite obvious that TJ has no idea what his rights are. Howver, he is proud of the troops for fighting for them, whatever they are, and that makes him a better American than you. More importantly, you must realize that a true patriot would give up all of his/her national identity and civil rights in order to feel a little less scared about a few terrorists. A true patriot would also never question foreign policy as it pertains to terrorism - that would only aid the enemy, whoever it may be.
It's independent of cookies. With HOSTS and manual editing of your cookies, you're doing what software programs does manually. Windows (ME and up) uses the Hosts file for developers and programmers who want a shortcut without looking at web addresses all the time. Instead of checking bbs.clutchfans.net, they could use the Hosts file to direct it to some designated file in their computer (C://clutch). The zip file from the webpage directs all the nasty addresses they've found and put it in the HOSTS file. So now if you get a page that directs you to Adserve.com, the file will tell windows to find it in your computer, which you don't have. HOSTS gives non-programmers the option of one giant filter that uses no added computer resources or programs. The con is that if you want to see the ad and you can't... You'd have to manually edit the host file, or rename it to something else...wait 20 seconds for windows to refresh...and then view the file, finally undo rename to turn on the filter. Another problem is if you goto a site that has links that redirect you, such as fatwallet or slickdeals. That redirection is really an ad counter that tracks your web movements and it helps them make money. I usually goto the web address, get the error message (file not found becuase it's looking at your computer) and copy the end of the link, which has the real link. But these aren't really problems, since you can manually edit what you want to see. The hosts file is one giant text file. I put the folder that has the HOSTS file as a shortcut on my quick links. It makes it easy to edit or turn off. The advantages make the thing worth it, but I'm technically working right now....
The funny thing is, year after year, US used to critisize Chinese government in human rights report, for spying on people without warrants, monitoring people's phone calls and internet activities etc etc. I guess after so many researches, they just realized those are actually good methods to control people, and simply adapted them, of course in the name of fighting something, just like the Chinese government did.
You know what I want access to the files of EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER I wanna know all their fines, disciplinary problems, Every complaint, mental reviews EVERYTHING!! and before ya'll say anything . . . IF THEY AIN'T DOING ANYTHING WRONG . . . THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT is that not correct? doesn't it work both ways? Rocket River
Good idea, and it will be good for America. We must act quickly: I suspect that George W. Bush is a danger to America. I want to see every file related to everything he's ever done, and I'd also like to listen to all his phone calls, as well as the phone calls of his associates and sympathizers and bootlickers. I will, however, forego listening to bigtexxx's 1-900-HOT-SLUT phonecalls.
