Fwd: GNU hackers discover HACIENDA government surveillance and give us a way to fight back

[flapflap]

Robert J. Hansen:
[snip]
> Also note that, contrary to the FSF's press release, this isn't
> government surveillance.  It isn't even surveillance in the usual sense
> of the word.  If you run a public service like HTTP, how is it
> "surveillance" for someone, anyone, to say "the server sixdemonbag.org,
> located at IP address 111.222.333.444, is running FooHTTPD 3.17"?
> That's like driving down the street and reporting on what colors
> people's houses are and whether they have their garage door open.
> 
> Distasteful, sure.  But "surveillance" seems to mean something more:
> someone listening in on things that you have good reason to believe are
> private.

I'm not happy with that definition/understanding of "surveillance". It's
not just about "reporting on what colors people's houses are" - it's
more about someone going to every door, trying to open it, and noting
what kind of door and lock there is. Then, comes back with a key, opens
the door, installs cameras and other things. Next, he continues with the
next house, but if someone finds him, he says he's you. And then walks
to the next house.

HACIENDA itself may not be "surveillance", because it is an active
attack/attempt to actively connect to a TCP socket and not just
(passively) monitoring how other people connect to the server.
However on a meta-level (=government), this is surveillace, because they
look for "things that you have good reason to believe are private"
(remember the slide that lists passwords as publicly available
information...).