U.S. Government Accidentally Abuses Internet "Kill Switch", Shuts off 84,000 Sites

Only a small group of 4chan will do something. Majority of 4chan now is loner high school kids and immature losers who don't know anything besides quick self gratification.

They should not shut down websites, period, unless they have done an investigation and proven it in court, with the website's owner/manager having the right to defend themselves.

I cannot believe how many posters think it is okay to allow Obama the same rights that the Iranian government has in controlling, without due process or reason, the expression of free speech.

yep they cant shut down websites... seems to me like thats an unlawful seizure of property to me... isnt that somewhere in the constitution that they pray to?

and the 2012 election.

There is no way Obama can win in 2012. The GOP voters would rather stick needles in their eyes than vote for him, I don't care how much he tries to tart himself up as a Born-Again Republican. Obama's alienated a large portion of his 2008 voters, and, judging by the 2010 turnout, created a lot of apathetic Democratic voters, as well.

So, Obama--so desperate to be accepted by the Republicans one of them--is going to do the ultimate GOP thuggery...win an election using whatever means is necessary.

How convenient for him he has kept open Gitmo.

i think we will go from bad to worse in 2012 it been down hill for years

they're probably working on a systematic kill switch and this was just an accidental hit of a button

I think Obama is gearing up for the 2012 campaign....want to bet we see this same "accident" happen to anti-Obama websites starting about a month before the election?

That's a good point and a scary scenario and I will be very disappointed should it happen.

Thats why we need net neutrality, neither side is can be allowed to do this.

The government can do whatever it wants if it is in the name of "national security."

With the "accidents" that occur at the hands of our government, I don't think our government should have control of a fly-swatter. Think how many innocent civilians in the Middle East would be alive today if that was the case.

Excellent point

Point taken.

Still very convenient.

There was no Child Porn. And many sites share IP addresses. Sharing DNS is no different and was the main way people made Internet sites at first.

You wouldn't shut down Blogger or Wordpress because one site had Child Porn.

84,000 = "a few"?

I'll let you count the gray hairs on my head in the future. I like your Obama math.

He means a few in comparison to the number of internet sites on the internet. Yes, 84,000 is a lot of websites, but compared to the entire web, it might as well just be a handful.

They accidentally took down 84,000 sites instead of 10.

Bullshit. We are talking about censorship of free speech by the government, that "accidentally" shut down 85,000 websites and fraudulently accused them of having child pornography.

Shutting down ONE website under such circumstances is abhorrent and suspicious. Shutting down 85,000...it's either pure incompetence or pure fascism at the hands of the Obama administration.

its a learning curve, not fascism. Tech moves way faster than government. did you forget ?

84000 websites divided by 250000000 total websites = 0.0336% of total websites. very few

The article title is misleading. This is not the "kill switch" that is being discussed. Instead it is a misapplication of existing search and seizure laws. I feel that it is likely that the prosecutors that gained this court authorization did not fully understand what they were doing. I don't feel that excuses their actions, but it makes a lot more sense than sweeping conspiracy theories.

I just read that Lieberman is making it illegal for the president to have a kill switch in the new revision of the bill.

When you shut down 84,000 sites your are killing a huge chunk of the Internet.

http://www.domaintools.com/internet-statistics/

0.06% isn't really a "huge chunk" But I do agree with you that it seems unnecessarily large. It sounds like our justice system needs more training on how to deal with this interwebs thingy.

I hate it when people say interwebs, lol.

*throws networking guide*

And who decides what is a "conspiracy theory"?

Do you realize that when Keith Olbermann said what many of us knew--that there were no WMDs in Iraq and Bush was using lies to get us involved in an invasion and occupation of Iraq--it was called "a conspiracy theory"?

It seems like there should be no ability of government to censor the internet, except by proving, site by site, following a public investigation and the ability of the accused to defend themselves, that there is something illegal going on.

Do you realize that by accepting Obama's "right" to censor internet sites at his whim and need pushes us one step closer to having a government like Iran?

I agree with you. However, I think a reasonable definition for conspiracy includes an intent for wrongdoing. This story sounds a lot more like a bunch of morons not knowing what they're doing. I don't think that's a conspiracy.

I also feel that a warrant issued by a court based on probable cause should be the only tool available for anyone to gain access or control of any information or website without the owner's consent. That's not the current state of affairs, and we should demand that our legislators enact laws to protect us from this kind of over reaching action.

Theres 250 million websites, 84000 is 0.0336%

Before the government shuts down any web site, they should be required to prove, in a public hearing, where the accused can defend themselves, that something illegal is going on.

Obama is already clasping dearly the Bush/Cheney ability to lock up people, or send them to foreign prisons for torture, anybody he wants just by calling them a "terrorist."

Shall we broaden that category?

QUOTING ROLDAN: "But, as in the words of Ari Fleisher, who declared not long ago that "nowadays you have to be careful what you say and do" perhaps we should thread carefully in these times of ours, not with docile obedience, but perhaps with infallible research, intelligent dissent and righteous determination?"

--------

NO, BAD AND FASCIST IDEA.

Let's stick to the Constitution/BOR, okay? Obama needs to prove it in a public hearing, where the accused can defend themselves. No "open-to-interpretation" clauses, such as "intelligent dissent."

Who is the arbiter of what is "intelligent dissent"?

Either we have freedom of speech, or we don't. When you allow our government to act like the Iranian government and censor what it wants based on made-up, nebulous reasons, we have taken another big step towards dictatorship.

Who is the arbiter of what is "intelligent dissent"?
A jury of your peers.

"where the accused can defend themselves, that something illegal is going on."
Are you sure thats what you meant to say ?

PoliticalAmazon,

Are you calling me, or my comment, Fascist?

Would you care to clarify this claim, and provide evidence, please?

You have at your disposal my comment on this thread, and my comments in others. If you need, I can provide you with the links to other News articles on this site where I have posted comments and replies. Because, if my words and thoughts reflect a Fascist inclination, I would like to change my views immediately, for Fascism is an ignoble ideology that I would never, EVER obey, observe or follow.

And so I have a couple of questions (and answers) regarding your understanding of my post in this thread:

Did I say “throw accusations around without basis in fact or reality”?

No. I said we should respond to abuses of power from the .gov and/or corporations with our foot standing on solid, watertight research of facts, effects and causes, Academia style.

Did I say “let’s respond to perceived injustices with violent revolt?”

No. I said let’s combat social inequalities, however minimal, with intelligent argumentation, one that can stand any challenge and come out victorious because of its moral validity and its idealistic purpose.

Did I say “Let’s demonstrate our indignation à la Tea Party style, with xenophobic rhetoric, insulting banners and crazed requests”?

No. I said let’s raise our voices impulsed by moral indignation and determination, not fueled by deranged nationalism and dreams of dictatorial governance.

We are a Nation that preaches solemnly -and even forces through bloodshed– democratic ideals on others, if only to protect its Economic Interests Abroad, but I say, let us stop preaching to others what we ourselves don’t practice in our own home ground, and let us instead demand from ourselves and from our government a strict adherence to the noble precepts as inscribed for posterity in our Constitution.

It is my own personal experience ( I was born in small Central American country which was ravaged by Civil war – my generation decimated beyond repair and without moral justification, and the survivors plunged in uber-misery, and I became of age in another where government atrocities were committed at plain light of day, under the paternal consent and auspices of the biggest Democracy in the Western World., so I know what hunger, war and terror feels like, in the flesh.

I know what an oppressive regime is willing to do to hold on to power and plunder the wealth of a nation, be it the labor of its people, its natural resources or anything else of value they can steal, like thieves in the dark of night.

This Nation is far, far from reaching a stage like that, a violent point of no return.

But this stability and relative peace can only be guaranteed if its citizens “remain vigilant”, as the cliché goes, and, thus, we should not permit the nascent abuses of today, however small, to become the grave, irreparable injustices of tomorrow,

These are my views, and I am intelligent enough to recognize when I am wrong, but this time I have to “refudiate” you (hey, I also have a great sense of humor, I am not a complete asshole and can take a joke or two!)

I may be many things, Political Amazon, but a Fascist I am not, of this you can be sure. I am just a simple man with a simple ideal: Justice for all.

Makes you wonder about all of the peeps imprisoned in Gitmo, and shipped off to torture in foreign prisons.

It seems that Obama's batting score on the 84,000 websites on which he illegally suppressed the right of free speech is WORSE than Iranian government's was in their 2009 murderous protester suppression.

This is not nearly important enough for Obama to know about. You put him on a really high horse with words like that.

your right, I saw that kind a couple months back , it was on a music site i.e. they had copyrighted music , no porn crap- there has been a legal battle over dispalying music or video's on the net for a long time now,.. I suppose they realized they weren't gonna win on that , so they pulled the Porn card-

BC they targeted the DNS name and not the IP.

Afraid provides dynamic DNS and Backup DNS services. You can Assign a domain you own or one of their free sub domains to a home server for instance.

That does make more sense, which is probably way it's not such a high priority.
Finding illegal porn on the internet is a real pain in the ass because everything digital can be translated into 0's and 1's then broken up into little pieces and hidden in seemingly innocuous pages. Even if you happen to find a piece there's really no way to find all the others and get enough for a conviction, or even to get an idea of what you've found.

All this does is alert people to move to encrypted networks like Tor.

If they had half a brain, they'd know that already...
You notice ICE only got 10 out of 84,000?
I doubt I'm alerting anyone, those 10 probably can't even read or go to http://www.foxnews.com/ for their news.

Because they are retarded and didn't understand what a dynamic DNS provider is.

The article said it was a case of "mistaken identity" and an "accident". Who they are looking for, they had a seizure warrant for, which the article also said. Courts can not grant warrants without "probable cause". They found 10 pedophiles and their outlets, or kids taking pictures of themselves and posting, proving "probable cause" was, get this, warranted. The rest will be back online shortly.

Whoever was working this case didnt know that. ? (I didn't) But someone could totally get himself a job if he proved his worth and were able to execute faster and cleaner than the 80,000 expendables like this time. They'll need all the help they can get, or start a business doing it, a nonprofit maybe. There's obviously a hole in ability, not direction, so there's work to be done = money.

How would you like to be unemployed, and have a potential employer do an internet search only to find your web page you put up with your resume, etc., has been closed by the government because there was "child pornography" on it?

Shouldn't they actually find the people instead of targeting a disposable domain they used?

It goes deeper than that. If the agents and judges do not know these basics they should not be assigned to these cases. In fact they may have just given a free pass to the people who had the child porn.

I could explain to a non computer person what happened because it's not complicated at all.

yea, that's exactly why they would hire someone like you, lawyers maybe too. Its also up to the people to make sure they know so they don't have things like this happen. Its a learning curve. There's money to be made here, I think.