Nominations Open For "Most Likely to be Shut Down By Government"

The corporate overlords at SourceForge asked me to name a Slashdot category for their upcoming Community Choice Awards and to let you guys select the winner. I have named my category "Most Likely to be Shut Down by a Government Agency." We're going to run this like we do an Ask Slashdot call for questions — post your nominations into the comments here. Use moderation to send up good ideas. In the upcoming days we'll post another story where you can vote on the actual winner. Nominations need to include the project name, a link to some sort of official website, and a paragraph of why you think they deserve to win. The project that wins will gain fame, notoriety, and maybe a cease and desist order that they could print out and frame if they had that kind of time.

Truecrypt

[elrous0 (869638)]

Truecrypt [truecrypt.org]

It's basically only a matter of time before the fear-mongers and political demagogues in the U.S. and elsewhere outlaw any form of encryption that doesn't include a backdoor for the NSA and other "trusted" government agencies. There has already been evidence of commercial encrytption (such as Windows encryption [slashdot.org]) including such backdoors. And when the commercial companies all cave, how long do you think it will be before the government comes after the open source projects too?

Re:Truecrypt

[bsDaemon (87307)]

Couldn't/wouldn't they just move the project outside of the country to avoid issues? OpenBSD doesn't have to abide by crpyto export rules because they are in Canada, for instance.

Of course, I suppose the argument could be used for pretty much every project that is likely to be mentioned.

Re:Truecrypt

[Quila (201335)]

They started trying in the 90s under Clinton's reign, with Al Gore as the point man. Luckily resistance from people and businesses was enough to kill the Clipper Chip and Key Escrow. over 10 years later, I guess it's time for another round of facists to try it again.

Re:Truecrypt

[Kingrames (858416)]

"facists"

I hate it when people discriminate against me just cause of my face.

Re:Truecrypt

[Z34107 (925136)]

Windows encryption doesn't "include such backdoors."

The random number generator is not used by default; a program has to specifically request it. If it does have a backdoor in it, presumably Microsoft added it so that other programs could be written with NSA backdoors.

Re:Truecrypt

[evanbd (210358)]

While all the knowledge is out there, and you *can* do it yourself, getting every single detail right is not even close to easy. Are you sure you didn't leave some piece of the key swapped out to disk? Are you certain your random number generator was of sufficient quality and well seeded? Modern cryptosystems fail thanks to details, and the only way to get every detail right is many eyes and lots of work. Amateur efforts can certainly do it, but it's not easy for either them or the pros. Just remember, "I used RSA" isn't good enough. Witness the Netscape SSL problem, and the recent Debian SSH problems for examples of where the support infrastructure around the cryptosystem failed.

Re:Truecrypt

[grandpa-geek (981017)]

Unbreakable encryption was invented by the US Army Signal Service in 1917. It is called the "one time pad". The encryption key is random and is as long as the message. The encryption is unbreakable as long as each key is used only once.

The drawback of a one-time pad system is the logistics of transporting the keys and having only two copies, that are destroyed after they are used.

Roosevelt and Churchill had transatlantic voice conversations during World War II that were encrypted using one-time pad technology. The conversations would remain unbreakable even if recordings of the radio transmissions were available today.

Re:Truecrypt

[Sloppy (14984)]

The drawback of a one-time pad system is the logistics of transporting the keys and having only two copies, that are destroyed after they are used.

One thing I enjoy harping on, is that there are many situations where OTP is actually quite practical; the transport and storage just aren't a big deal. For example: people you see in person every day. You put your phone next to your wife's phone at night, and they exchange pads over a wire or low-powered IR link or something. Your conversations the next day are OTPed.

As a general-purpose fix-everything solution OTP doesn't work, but sometimes it can, without really being very burdensome.

Re:Truecrypt

[SpaceLifeForm (228190)]

I don't need any 'approval' from anyone.

It was an experimental encryption algorithm and I screwed up
my hard drive, and now I can't decrypt it.

Does that help?

Re:Truecrypt

[digitrev (989335)]

You were experimenting without government approval? Off to GITMO with you, you terrorist scumbag.

Re:Truecrypt

[thtrgremlin (1158085)]

That is already true for physical locks. Possession of lock picking equipment is intent. You can not posses the tools without a license that you can not receive without certification that you can't get without going to an approved and certified school. It is unlawful to study outside of approved classrooms. This is why lock picks make so much money, and for anyone into OSS here, why is is also so easy for criminals to pick any lock or work around any theft deterrent device.

Patent Busting

[MistaE (776169)]

The EFF's Patent Busing Project [eff.org].

Or has it been shut down already?

Re:Patent Busting

[nuzak (959558)]

Yeah we need to end Patent Busing. Why should a patent have to go all the way across town to the same type of schools I moved to get away from?

Re:Patent Busting

[glarvat (753298)]

Yeah we need to end Patent Busing. Why should a patent have to go all the way across town to the same type of schools I moved to get away from?

I doubt the parent was trolling. It was an obviously misunderstood attempt at humo(u)r referencing School Desegregation [wikipedia.org] because of the typo in the GP (busing instead of busting).

For what it's worth, I thought it was funny.

Re:Patent Busting

[MistaE (776169)]

I didn't think the EFF's site needed any explanation but I'll provide it here for Taco since it was asked for in the summary.

I think this site should win because it's very likely to actually shut down if Patent Reform comes through. However, even if patent reform fails, I think it would be interesting to see what the lobbyists and congressional members do to come up with to try and take them down, because this site is one of the few out there that do a damn good job of calling out the patent trolls. In addition, it's one of the few that make the public aware of what all of us on Slashdot have known all along: that the patent system sucks, and these are the people that take advantage of it.

Re:Patent Busting

[jonbryce (703250)]

Do the mega corps want patent trolls around? I doubt it.

They want patents to stop small companies competing with them. If a small company sues them for patent infringement, they find lots of other patents in their portfolio that the small company is infringing, and come to some cross licencing deal. They can't do that with patent trolls because they don't have a business.

Software radio...

[Zelig (73519)]

The GNU software radio project

http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuradio/

is a good candidate. It proposes to let you make electromagnetic waves in a manner not subject to prior restraint by the FCC, and without the back-doors intelligence agencies have on many current means of communications.

This is naughty.

Re:Software radio...

[A nonymous Coward (7548)]

Not sure how much you are trolling and how much being sarcastic, but for the enlightenment of people who know little about the subject ...

The government (and court-approved) excuse for regulating the broadcast airwaves is that the radio spectrum is a limited resource, therefore public, therefore not private property.

Out of the presumption that the nanny state is required to regulate the airwaves for the public good comes the corollary that regulation has to include preventing unauthorized transmitters and receivers, and that is why Software Radio is a prime candidate for outlawing.

Software Radio relies on the fact that computers nowadays are fast enough to dissect received signals and format transmitted signals completely in software in real time. You no longer need hardware frequency selectors. The hardware only has to receive or broadcast the general signal, and software formats the specific frequency desired.

Of course this scares the bejaysus out of the government. It would mean any computer and minimal hardware could bypass all government regulation. Consider all the recent spectrum auctions where telecom giants paid billions of dollars for exclusive access to specific frequencies -- along comes software which would let anybody broadcast on or receive from any signal desired without having to pay for specific hardware dedicated to specific frequencies. One small hardware investment, free software, and you have eliminated the need for all those many telecom-specific pieces of hardware for each purpose.

Certainly there is need for some standardization of frequencies and protocols, but studies have shown the current system is no longer necessary. Ultrawideband and frequency hopping may even make interference a thing of the past and reduce the need for regulation to general protocol specs, such as apply to phone lines and allow faxes, modems, answering machines, and so many other ubiquitous devices to connect to land lines without heavy handed regulation.

Re:Software radio...

[Intron (870560)]

Whereas before you needed to be able to plug a crystal into a socket in order to do this. Geez. Hams have been accidentally or on purpose wandering around the frequency spectrum since radio began.

ThePirateBay

[nuzak (959558)]

They're the next allofmp3 -- they're getting named by name in international treaty talks.

Re:ThePirateBay

[Ynsats (922697)]

This was the first organization that popped into mind.

Sure they have lax rules surrounding them in the countries that they are based but it's only a matter of time before it goes beyond "making an example" and they are made "a precedent".

After them, the next on the chopping block would be Mininova.

wikileaks, followed by cryptome.org

[QX-Mat (460729)]

wikileaks, followed by cryptome.org for doing a better job and mirroring the same content

Matt

Re:wikileaks, followed by cryptome.org

[moderatorrater (1095745)]

I second wikileaks. It's got everything -- anonymity, copyright infringement, and (the ability, at least) classified documents. I'm surprised it's lasted as long as it has.

Slashdot

[AlephNot (177467)]

I would like to nominate Slashdot as being most likely to be shut down. After all, free thought is anathema to government control.

Re:Slashdot

[onecheapgeek (964280)]

On Slashdot internet, thinking frees you.

Actually, I just mean that there is no free thinking here, just stupid cliched memes.

Re:Slashdot

[Duhavid (677874)]

"Actually, I just mean that there is no free thinking here, just stupid cliched memes."

Like this one?

Re:Slashdot

[MrHanky (141717)]

Yes, but on Slashdot, thought isn't free. It's merely open source: you can look at it, modify it, but if you start treating it as your own, then the thought owns you, Soviet style.

Re:Slashdot

[elrous0 (869638)]

Slashdot can't be shut down. The software behind it became self-aware years ago. It sneaks around on the internet and hides out on various servers. "Commander Taco" is, in fact, just an alias for the software, which killed the real Commander Taco in 2001 (rumor has it that his body is hidden deep within the steam tunnels of Redmond Washington, dressed in clothing that was already out of style even then).

wikileaks

[asynchronous13 (615600)]

wikileaks - since it already was (sort of) shut down by government.

MediaDefender

[by Anonymous Coward]

Hey, they've actually committed some crimes now, right?

Tor, Freenet, and I2P

[by Anonymous Coward]

Tor, Freenet, and I2P are probably on the top of the list. There is no way that government wants difficult to trace communication to be availble to the general public.

Re:Tor, Freenet, and I2P

[zappepcs (820751)]

There is no way that government wants difficult to trace communication to be availble to the general public.

I thought that is how the USPS runs their next day delivery service?

FreeNet

[bsDaemon (87307)]

I suspect that FreeNet [freenetproject.org] is something that many, many governments would like to shut down. In the west, pretty much all they have to do is say "klddy pr0n" and it's gone. In China and other such countries, they don't really have to say anything at all.

Anyone notice the diamond sponsor?

[Reverend528 (585549)]

If you look to the right, Microsoft is listed as a diamond sponsor of the event. Hopefully the government will shut them down soon.

Re:Anyone notice the diamond sponsor?

[Lxy (80823)]

If you look to the right

This is Slashdot, everyone was looking to the left.

Freenet

[Sanity (1431)]

Freenet [freenetproject.org], especially now that its reaching the point of widespread usability [locut.us].

I Save RX

[Slightly Askew (638918)]

This [i-saverx.net] website, supported by the states, offers its citizens affordable medications from Canada and Europe. I predict the federal government will shut it down, citing "safety issues" with foreign drugs.

GOA

[ezwip (974076)]

www.gao.gov

Trapster

[Weaselmancer (533834)]

www.trapster.com [trapster.com]

It's an interactive thingy where you post where cops are hiding in speed traps.

I'm surprised it's still up, honestly.

Then tell me this

[Weaselmancer (533834)]

if you think a minute about such "traps", they are effectively achieving* their goal, which is to make people slow down in the corresponding area.

Then why hide?

Seriously. If they want people to slow down, why hide behind billboards and bridges and other stuff and pop out and snag people?

If they honestly wanted everyone to slow down they'd just park on the side of the road in the very most visible spot. Watch your fellow drivers on the freeway sometime. They see a cop car, they hit the brakes. Even if he has someone pulled over and its obvious they could fly right by him.

They hide because it helps them write tickets. That's the goal of a speedtrap. Income. I'm sure the PR people love to smile at the camera and talk about how their just saving lives, but their actions simply do not agree. You can't tell me that having all this ticket revenue pouring in means nothing.

If they really want people to drive the speed limit, park out in the open.

Our right to know.

[by Anonymous Coward]

We already have loads of censoring going on. for example, the 60 minute interview with Sibel edmunds was immediately gagged and then the studio was told to hand over EVERYTHING. In addition, ALL news org have been warned ahead to not talk about her.

In terms of software, PirateBay/Cryptome/GnuRadio. Anything dealing with encryption will NOT be shutdown, unless it involves a brand new and interesting algo.

Obama

[bidule (173941)]

Well, it worked for jfk...

What an extremely useful little competition ...

[Angostura (703910)]

... this is, for the powers that be.

The Memory Hole and its 'Fellow Travellers'

[Jeremiah Cornelius (137)]

http://thememoryhole.org/ [thememoryhole.org]

http://wikileaks.org/ [wikileaks.org]

http://cryptome.org/ [cryptome.org]

Tor?

[Facegarden (967477)]

Tor would be a good candidate for being outlawed by an overbearing government. I don't know much about it, but i can bet legal online anonymity will go if things keep going the way they are... -Taylor

But isn't this fear mongering?

[LWATCDR (28044)]

Really asking what site you think is going to be taken down next by some government agency seems like fear mongering in it's self.
Most take down notices have come not from law enforcement but from companies not the government.

The vast majority of these are civil actions.

Isn't this heading into the tin foil hats and black helicopter area?

Tor

[hansamurai (907719)]

I haven't seen this listed yet and a lot of great ones have been mentioned but I'd just like to throw Tor out there.

http://www.torproject.org/ [torproject.org]

My money is on

[RiddleofSteel (819662)]

Dunk'n Donuts! They are obviously just a front for Al-Qaeda with Rachel Ray as the master mind, I mean did you see that scarf!

I see BitTorrent going the way of the dodo...

[Ynsats (922697)]

BitTorrent only offers a software package the enables user to share data with an ease rivaling that of an open share on a network but without all of the hassles of completely insecure connections. That doesn't seem to stop the RIAA and the MPAA from trying to shut down even the idea that people should be able to use the Internet for what it was intended for, a free exchange of information. The software package was and is quite novel in the way it handles traffic and allows it to be shared across multiple connections and multiple computers. This is load distribution at a level higher than "enterprise class data systems". This is a huge productivity tool that can be used for sharing information over any kind of distributed network. It allows freedom and power.

What's going to stop it? The RIAA, MPAA and giant ISP's like Comcast and Verizon that throttle back torrent traffic. They will make cases for costs in bandwidth and network maintenance. The fact that many people use these types of peer-to-peer networks successfully and almost untraceably to share copyrighted information only adds to the arguments that the RIAA and MPAA will make to get it shut down. Since there entire websites like The Pirate Bay, Mininova, IsoHunt and even the BitTorrent website that link users to a large number of seeds for the torrent swarms of information copyrighted and non-copyrighted and such, it doesn't bode well for the tool either.

The RIAA and MPAA will use strong arm tactics and cite currently pending investigations in other parts of the world against such sites that employ the use of such software to cut the problem off at the head. It will likely lead to sweeping legislation that will outlaw many forms of file sharing. For references, look at what the RIAA and MPAA have managed to successfully do against those users with home media center looking to place digital copies of their license media on to online storage. Sure, selling the means to do the illegal act isn't illegal but that doesn't mean someone won't try to make it illegal.

Re:Problem with Poll/Question

[ScuttleMonkey (55)]

If you feel strongly about a project feel free to comment in support of said project.

We will do our best to try selecting the most popular/controversial projects for the eventual poll that will allow you to actually vote.