Seville Paranoid Leftys Indymedia Hackers and the FBI

by Rose Sat Jun 08, 2002 23:58

Is this SWP crap? How can they be so moronic and discredited?

by Komsomol Sun Jun 09, 2002 03:39 komsomol at swirve dot com

id love to be able to afford a firewall, unfortunatly i cant... is there any good free ones out??

by Aidan Sun Jun 09, 2002 12:00

Not crap the poster is an IMCer, and I've looked at his software, it checks out, unfortunately.

Aidan

by Stealth Sun Jun 09, 2002 14:10

amerikkkan signal centre? what the hell is that? it sounds like some master control room!!! is it for all types of signals? i better go now they are probably entering my computer as i type....................................

by Stealth Sun Jun 09, 2002 14:42

i tryed to find a site for the signal centre with no success(suprise-suprise) but i found this list of american/uk defense sites!! makes for some interesting reading.

http://www.pixi.com/~irvdili/page-39.htm

by marty Mon Jun 10, 2002 00:56

Even if(and it probably is) all this is spot on,ARE YOU REALLY SURPRISED????????
Fecks sake,sure it's happinin' all the time,to all of us,always.
Get over this,learn to protect yourself + CHILLL OUT-believe u me,it's the best option.

by D Mon Jun 10, 2002 11:20

This checks out, but there's no need to TALK LIKE THIS!!!! or else you can't blame people for thinking your a nut.

by IRISHAV8ER - NOT SWP Mon Jun 10, 2002 11:48

NOT SWP or any other organisation (not thats has anything to do with my article/issues or facts in above posting)

where do you get your information?
Which part of the post is "crap" as I said i am no expert in computer security, are you? if so please let me know what I got wrong.

Did you actualy research the detail in my post or are you just saying the first thing that comes in to your head?

please only post if you have somthing to say
all this "SWP this" "SWP that" bitching is realy realy realy realy realy realy realy realy boring and lowers the tone of the indymedia newswire

by C. Tue Jun 11, 2002 10:03

If anybody is interested, the links here will get you a packet sniffer for windows (you should install winpcap and then use analyser.exe to start a capture).

Using this you see all the Internet traffic on your PC - including any 'spyware'. It produces a lot of data, but you can filter out any IP addresses that you know where they are from and then check the remaining ones at somewhere like www.samspade.org . This way you will see what is being sent from your computer (including cookies etc.).

This is the same technology that is used to listen in after your request has left your machine. By putting the packet sniffer on a network you see all the IP (or other protocols) traffic - and can read it or check it for phrases and the match these to the IP address. (e.g. computer sees 'free thought' in a packet, gets the requesting IP address, tracks this to an ISP using a reverse whois like at samspade. Now that ISP's will have to maintain matches between IP addresses they handed out and your phone number it can be conclusively proven that you had free thoughts.) You can see the encrypted traffic if you surf to a https site with a capture turned on, or have something like pgp mail.

BTW, the worse spyware I've seen comes with AudioGalaxy, the music program.

http://winpcap.polito.it/

http://analyzer.polito.it/

by IWAR Sat Jun 15, 2002 17:32

SPY WARE ALERT ON COMPUTERS.

Foreign marketing companies are secretly plundering Australian home computers for personal information – and claiming a legal right to do so.
Some are even blocking security companies from alerting computer users to the privacy threat.
Experts have warned of a proliferation of “spy ware” programs downloaded from the Internet that operate secretly on personal computers.
Many are disguised as gimmicky programs that appeal to children by using cartoon characters that perform tricks while the computer is running.
What operators do not know is that the programs collect personal information from the computer and send it across the Internet to foreign operators who compile personal profiles for marketing companies.
A large South American company threatening legal action blocked a Brisbane-based virus-protection company, which developed software to warm users when stealth programs were downloading.
Leprechaun Software principal Jack Kenyon, whose Capalaba company developed the Virus Buster program, said he was alerted after his son downloaded a program featuring a purple cartoon gorilla.
“I found it very hard to take off the computer,” he said.
“That made me a bit suspicious so I started looking into it.”
Mr. Kenyon said some spy ware featured novelty cursors that changed shape while a program worked insidiously in the background.
“It watches what websites you hit as well as what programs you’ve got on your system, so marketers can target you,” he said.
“Most people would probably not want this stuff on their machine but we can’t warn people about it.
Some of the programs are touted as commercial software with a free download and a minimal fee for upgrades. Because they do not spread to other machines, they are not regarded as viruses.
Mr. Kenyon said some spy programs recorded every keystroke made on a host computer.
Even with sites termed “secure.” there was a possibility that log-on names and passwords could be passed on.
“If it’s on your machine it is like someone sitting on your shoulder watching.
Whatever you see, it can see,” Mr Kenyon said.
A representative for the Federal Privacy Commissioner warned that while the Privacy Act required people to be informed if certain information was being collected, it probably would not cover overseas companies.
But technology expert Anna Sharpie, from legal firm Clayton Utz, said it was arguable that collecting data in Australia could be deemed to be carrying on business here, and would fall within the scope of the
http://barcelona.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=16315&group=webcast
LSSI for dummies). LSSI: A law through which the political powers will have the legal right to control, censor and close-down web sites, transforming the Internet into a commercial and oligarchic communication medium.

What is LSSI?

LSSI (Society and Services of Information Law) is a bill that the PP (Partido Popular, right-wing conservative party currently in government in Spain) have been heralding since 2000 and has taken a long time to be approved due the large degree of controversy that it carries. Essentially the bill is based on the 'Electronic Commerce Directive' of the European Union. But in passing from European directive to Spanish law, the content has distorted so much that one can say that conceptually, its Spanish form is unprecedented amongst Western countries. The de facto European directive is centred on the problem of privacy and the security of commercial information over the Internet: is contains no caluse that deals with non-commercial web sites or the information contained within them. In contrast, LSSI is no wholly concerned with electronic commerce, but rather looks to regulating and controlling network information services.

This distortion was brought into existence by members of the commercial schools of the PP and of the Opus Dei and more specifically by a secretary of the Ministry of New Technologies, Mr BORJA ATZUARA who has been highly criticised for occupying an interior administrative position in the Ministry without being a civil servant, something prohibited by law. Borja has already made around 25 drafts of the law because of the large amount of criticism it has received from both outside and inside state institutions, but has managed to keep the general sentiment of the law right up to the latest version.

The argument of the LSSI in part centres on the confirmation that the traditional mediums of communication are penalised by the proliferation of digital medium on the Net; these being easy to publish and powerful at affecting opinion. Based on this premise (which certainly hasn't come from any traditional communication mediums that publish their own web sites and services, continuing to have the power to affect public opinion), the LSSI proposes the regulation of Internet domains via the creation of an ADMINISTRATIVE REGISTRY, which will establishes who is responsible for each domain. The law governing the diffusion of information over the Internet will the same as it is with the press. Which means that currently a state licence is required in order to publish a newspaper and it will be the same for the publishing of web pages.

There are at least TWO SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES from this.

FIRSTLY: that web sites will have very high costs (solicitors, notaries, taxes), and it will make it practically impossible for many organisations or individuals to manage their web pages. In fact, only the web sites of companies or those that have sufficient income will continue operating. The structure of the Internet itself will have to change, because the sites wishing the survive will have to become commercial.

SECONDLY: there will be a very strong and centralised control over web site content. The law is vague in declaring which authority will be responsible for controlling web sites and deciding their legitimacy. The only thing that is clear is that it will be an administrative and not judicial authority. This is definitely very bad, because according to Spanish law, only a judge may close down a communication medium (article 8 of the Ley Organica de Poder Judicial) and obviously much controversy has arisen over this point. Particularly, the Consejo General del Poder Judicial (General Council of Judicial Power), although declaring itself in favour of the LSSI, has seen one of its members take an exceedingly critical position towards the law. Judge ALFONSO MARTIN (of the CGPJ) underlined that the criteria by which, following the LSSI, one can shut down a web site are not clearly defined and could lead to arbitrary decisions. These are:

- Defence of minors' rights.

- Attempts against freedom of expression. (contradiction in terms!!!)

- National security.

- Internal national public order.

It goes without saying that this last point, for example, could be used to shut down a web site for having informed about a summons an illegal protest. It remains pretty clear that government's policy will be to close a few of the more annoying sites (the Basque sites, Indymedia and Sindominio for example) in order that others begin auto-censorship in order to avoid fines, which range 300 and 600 million Euros. In the last draft (that has now been approved by Congress) the PP tried to clear up the question of the appropriate ministry but still without specifying with clarity its powers.

This is a case of political control of the Internet that has no equivalent in any other Western country; given that up to now the policies of the United States and the European Union have always been to leave the Net free to develop and stimulate the economies of each country. The LSSI will transform the Internet in Spain into an official network. Currently, such a thing only exists in China, Syria, Cuba and Saudi Arabia. Although at an official level the policy of the European Union is very distinct from this, there's no doubt that this is like an experiment; a form of pilot project to see whether this control is applicable in other parts of the World.

Obviously, there is a lot of imobilisation amongst international movements because this law is seen as an attempt to evict cyberspace, that in addition will above all affect the organisations and individuals that contribute most to the technical and political development of the Net. The nature of the Net's structure implies free use without control. Already Internet communication is transnational and virtual: theoretically the Internet belongs to no one state and there is no authority that has the physical capacity to block a server or shut down a web page. It is only possible to exercise control over the Internet by legally attacking physical people who are under the jurisdiction of state powers, which is the repressive measure exercised by the dictatorships and fundamentalist states that were named earlier. In every so-called 'democratic' state, there are laws that defend the freedom of expression via whatever communication medium. Up until now, the Internet has represented the most democratic medium developed.

Obviously the counterproposal that Internet users and libertarian political collectives that work over the Net are calling for is the modification of the essence of the LSSI so that it not affect non-commercial web sites; this is the direction in which the European directive was already heading. On the Internet there are already registrars of web pages, those of ICANN and service providers. It is requested that national registrars not be created and that the international ones be accepted as these are the ones through which the Internet was born and has grown. In summary, that the Internet continue being a communications medium free and without censorship, and that the regulation of the Net doesn't come from up on high or from national authorities but rather from the self same users and workers of the Net.

http://barcelona.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=19540

by INFORMATION IS POWER Mon Jun 17, 2002 12:01

When posting on to Indymedia recentley (RTS) I found my IP adress blocked, which means someone put a block on me posting stuff on to the indymedia site. It appears that it was not indymedia techi crew.
Anyboddy else had this problem?

To "get around" the problem I just went to another Internet cafe and posted from there computers.
I had to use another computer every time as these were soon blocked also.
Intresting