SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
All of you knew that it could only get worse:
Kaspersky malware probers have uncovered a new 'operating system-like' platform that [they claim] was developed and used by the National Security Agency (NSA) in its Equation spying arsenal. The EquationDrug or Equestre platform is used to deploy [an estimated] 116 plug-in modules to target computers that can siphon data and spy on victims. So far, only 30 modules have been identified.
"It's important to note that EquationDrug is not just a trojan, but a full espionage platform, which includes a framework for conducting cyber-espionage activities by deploying specific modules on the machines of selected victims," Kaspersky researchers say in a report.
The article goes on to explain that Kaspersky further believes that the software is part of the "NSA's campaign to infect hard disk firmware". There is considerably more detail in the article.
I think I am going to get my old manual typewriter out of the garage, get a new ribbon, use U.S. Mail instead of e-mail, and buy more ink for my fountain pens.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 16 2015, @05:09PM
> They will eventually have the technology to read inside nearly everything without opening it.
As that's the stereotypical case of an expectation of privacy, that's going to require a warrant. Not even a gray area on that one.
> How much longer before tin foil hats are needed to keep them from scanning us for pre-crime?
That is one giant leap to go from x-ray scanning text on paper to 'pre-crime' - like a crazy mad-libs level of logic.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by HiThere on Monday March 16 2015, @05:46PM
Legally you may have a point. In practice federal agents have intercepted and opened mails before now without a warrant. (Yes, it was in time of war, but that just means "sufficient political pressure".)
And are you really willing to believe that if they were doing it for awhile before anyone found out about it, that those who committed the felony would be punished? How about those who induced it? These days (perhaps always, but the evidence is ambiguous) the government is only restrained by what they have the power to do, not by what they have the right to do. This is partially because the governmental system is systematically biased such that the only ones who achieve power are those who desire it to an unreasonable degree.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Ryuugami on Monday March 16 2015, @07:44PM
Yes, it was in time of war, but that just means "sufficient political pressure".
Ah. War on Drugs, War on Terror, War on Copyright Infringement, War on the Neighbors Dog...
If a shit storm's on the horizon, it's good to know far enough ahead you can at least bring along an umbrella. - D.Weber
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 16 2015, @08:02PM
> In practice federal agents have intercepted and opened mails before now without a warrant.
No. Not "in practice." In very rare and limited circumstances.
And while I agree those circumstances are bullshit, to generalize from that to a standard practice is also a huge leap.
Could we get a sense of proportion around here? Please?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2015, @04:05AM
Citation?
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday March 16 2015, @08:30PM
As that's the stereotypical case of an expectation of privacy, that's going to require a warrant.
The NSA's mass surveillance already violates the constitution. Do you honestly think they care?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 17 2015, @12:22AM
Seems like they care very, very much.
Else they wouldn't have gone to such great efforts to hide its existence and then to pretend it didn't violate the constitution.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday March 17 2015, @01:22AM
They don't care that they violate the constitution. They care about the outrage that may ensue once they're found out, and the fact that there will be lawsuits (that might fail).
So what we get is a situation where they hide all their unconstitutional activities until we discover them somehow, and then maybe the courts tell them to stop in the unlikely event that they feel like stopping them from violating the constitution.