| 
          
         | 
        
          
            <<  
             ^ 
              >>
          
          
            
              
                Date: 2001-08-12
                 
                 
                Keystroke-Logging und das FBI
                
                 
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
                 
                
      Rund um das Thema FBI und Key-Logging ist zwischen Declan  
McCullaghed [Wired]  und Thomas Greene [The Register]  
ausgebrochen. Der neue FBI-Direktor Robert Mueller hat vor einem  
Senatsauschuss angegeben, von der erwähnten Technik zur  
Überwachung von Keyboard-Eingaben keine Ahnung zu haben.  
Greene wiederum hat ein Dokument des CERT zum Thema Key- 
logging von 1992 ausgegraben und siehe  - Robert Mueller kam  
darin vor. 
Related 
http://www.quintessenz.at/archiv/msg01570.html
                   
-.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-   
by Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>  
 
I'm a big fan of Thomas' work, but I don't think his article below  
makes the case that our new FBI director lied to Congress. 
 
The 1992 CERT advisory -- Robert Mueller is listed in the  
acknowledgements -- talks about keystroke logging of the form  
done by system and network administrators.  
(http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-1992-19.html) The obvious  
methods at the time to do so were tools like tcpdump and even  
printers hooked up in the way Cliff Stoll documents in the Cuckoo's  
Egg. There's a big difference between monitoring what users are  
doing on a multi-user, networked Unix system accessed entirely  
remotely and recording what one person is typing locally on a  
Windows PC. 
 
Last week I posted the transcript of Mueller's comments before the  
Senate Judiciary committee. In response to a question about the  
Scarfo monitoring technology, which the FBi developed internally in  
the last few years, he replied: 
 
http://www.politechbot.com/p-02341.html >MR. MUELLER: I'm not  
familiar with that new technology, have not had >occasion to use it  
in our district. I read the same article that the >senator read, with  
interest, because it was the first I'd ever heard if >it. Until I know  
more about it, I really don't think I can commit one way >or the  
other. 
 
Those comments seem to be truthful. I don't think the Scarfo  
technology -- based on what we know of it -- is anything near what  
the CERT advisory is talking about. 
 
-Declan 
 
********* 
 
From: "Thomas C. Greene" <tcgreene@bellatlantic.net> Subject:  
FBI chief Mueller lied to Senate about key-logging Date: Wed, 8  
Aug 2001 15:06:07 -0700 
 
 
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/20894.html
                   
 
FBI chief Mueller lied to Senate about key-logging By Thomas C  
Greene in Washington mailto:thomas.greene@theregister.co.uk
                   
 
New FBI chief Robert Mueller's testimony before the US Senate  
during his confirmation hearing last week, to the effect that he had  
no understanding of key-logging technology, sounded very wrong to  
us. 
 
We were hoping that he was just exhibiting naiveté when, under  
questioning from US Senator Maria Cantwell (Democrat,  
Washington State) about the FBI's prosecution of mobster  
Nicodemo Scarfo, Jr. by means of a black-bag job involving a key  
logger, Mueller claimed that he's "not familiar with that new  
technology, and [had] not had occasion to use it in [his] district." 
 
We figured that little gem had to be either a bald-faced lie, or  
evidence of his technical incompetence and consequent unfitness  
to lead the FBI in the 21st Century. 
 
Naturally, we all prefer honest incompetence to active deceit, and  
we were hoping that the second explanation would prove right; but  
we're sorry to report that we've got evidence that actually Mueller  
knows a great deal about key-logging technology. 
 
If we consult the following advisory  
http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-1992-19.html from the Computer  
Emergency Response Team (CERT) Coordination Center at  
Carnegie Mellon University, we find that Mueller contributed to a  
report on the legalities of installing key-logging technology on a  
network. 
 
The bulletin advises systems administrators that because key  
logging could be controversial (as the courts had yet to rule on its  
legality), it would be best to put a prominent banner warning users  
and intruders alike that their comings and goings will be monitored. 
 
The bulletin is dated December 1992, revised September 1997.  
Clearly, Mueller has been well acquainted with the technology he  
told Congress he knows nothing about. 
 
Sadly, it appears he lied to Congress. And even if he was splitting  
hairs, i.e., speaking of a very specific implementation of key- 
logging technology which he himself hasn't yet played with, he's  
still deceitful. 
 
He might have been a man about it, and declined to answer on  
grounds that the technology in question is currently being tested in  
the courts -- that is, in the Scarfo case. At least he would have  
shown some spine. But by fobbing off the question with a lie, or  
with a split-hair statement calculated to mislead the Senate, he's  
demonstrated that he's afraid of tough questions, and eager to take  
the coward's path out. 
 
It's a very sad symbol of his brand-new tenure, and a most horrible  
way to start it. 
 
 
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.-
    
                 
- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
                
edited by  
published on: 2001-08-12 
comments to office@quintessenz.at
                   
                  
                    subscribe Newsletter
                  
                   
                
- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
                
                  <<  
                   ^ 
                    >> 
                
                
               | 
             
           
         | 
         | 
        
          
         |