NSA cookies / tempest in a teapot
I haven’t published anything about cookiegate, because I wasn’t convinced that cookies, by themselves, can do any tracking. Turns out I was right. If we're going to beat up on the Bush administration, let's do it for the things that really are threats to our liberties.
From Design Nine:
There is a tempest in a teapot over the National Security Agency's use of cookies on its Web site.
Let me say first that cookies can be and often are mis-used, and I routinely delete a lot of cookies left on my computer. And the NSA did use persistent cookies, which is against the Federal government's rules.
But having said that, the AP article being published almost everywhere is misleading, and perhaps intentionally so. Here is one example:
"....privacy advocates complain that cookies can also track Web surfing..."
The statement makes it sound like the NSA cookies could be used to see where you have been anywhere on the Web. There is no way to do that with cookies. They can be used to track where you have been on the NSA Web site, but that's all. It is a huge difference…
Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com
- 's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version- Send to friend
Join us & contribute
Proud members of the Democratic Party
Copyright 2006 Democrats.com. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy
See Bob's blog on this
See Bob's blog on this subject here:
http://www.democrats.com/node/7290
But the article was about cookies
The article was about cookies, and cookies are text files. They're benign. They'd need to post some kind of executable on your machine to capture the kind of information the article said they were using cookies to gather.
Yes, they're spying on us. But right now it's mostly information they're getting that passes BETWEEN computers. They're hitting up the ISPs, who are probably giving them what they want. It's the old TIA program that they said was disbanded, but that they simply renamed.
Let's make sure we hit them for what they're actually doing wrong, not what some misinformed AP writer says they're doing wrong.
Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com
I beg to differ...
I beg to differ with your source Carolyn. The cookies on your machine are indeed text files, but when these text files are recognized by a web server, they trigger "executables," or actions on the host machine. Cookies are basically a set of data instructions for the host web server, which also recognizes your unique IP address.
That last line was obviously an attempt to cover the real agenda of the NSA while following Dubya's orders. When the NSA, or any governmental agency, tracks my web usage through persistent cookies or any other means, it is no different than monitoring my public library usage, the telephone calls I make, or the charges on my credit card. It is anti-Constitutional unless an appropriate search warrant has been issued by a court of law.
This is the silliest...
...argument I've ever been in. I said before, and I'll say again, that the NSA IS spying on us, and that is terrible. But if we go around yelling that it's the cookies that are spying on us, the right wingers will call us tinfoil hat people.
With justification.
Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.comj
Carolyn, you are the only
Carolyn, you are the only one arguing -- I am simply pointing out facts. Your reliance on an industry "source" and your own "expert" knowledge of what cookies can, and can not, do is a fairly silly stance as well.
I have no desire to argue with you, or anyone else, but your defense of all cookies as being totally "benign" is just plain wrong. There is more than one kind of cookie, and for the most part they are harmless enough. But, persistent cookies and web bugs are very real, and CAN be used to track an individual's web usage across the Internet. If that is not spying, then I am at a loss to describe it any other way.
If, as you state as fact, all cookies are benign why would the government employ such strict rules regulating their useage? If, as you want us to believe, all cookies are harmless why are governmental agencies prohibited from using them carte blanche? This administration's misuse of the Internet goes back to 2000, and was the reason for writing most of the rules regulating the use of tracking cookies.
I am definitely not a "tin foil hat" person, but someone with a strong respect for facts. Yours are incomplete and misleading, and do a disservice to your readers. You can dismiss me as being silly, but you can not dismiss irrefutable facts as easily.
Yes, well...
...take another look at Bob's post. He changed it.
Caro
What I am pointing out has
What I am pointing out has nothing to do with Bob's post. I initially referred to his post as having to do with a similar subject.
I don't want non-techies to be misled by your industry source who states unequivocally that ALL cookies are harmless. They are not. Our government has tracked web surfing of American citizens in the past using persistent tracking cookies and when it was discovered, it was stopped. The potential is always there however, and this administration seems to have no compunction about spying on us -- only about getting caught doing so.
And, as a foot note, I routinely find "keylogger" implants on my computer -- about 2-3 times a month. I have no idea how they get there as I am running two firewalls (router and machine), Norton Antivirus, Norton Anti Spam, and two different spyware programs (only one of which finds the keylogger bug AFTER it has been installed). I have nothing to hide from anyone, but it makes me uncomfortable that with all of the "protection" I use someone is still able to sneak in the backdoor.