Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Dept. Of Homeland Security Chooses Groove, P2P

Posted by timothy on Mon Mar 15, 2004 10:52 PM
from the but-can-anyone-think-of-legitimate-uses-for-p2p dept.
Ryan Barrett writes "Groove Networks has announced that their P2P infrastructure will power the Homeland Security Information Network, an initiative to increase information sharing between federal, state, and local intelligence agencies. (The initiative doesn't give the govt. more information, it just helps agencies better share the information they already have.) Groove Workspace has also been certified with two govt. security standards, FIPS 140-2 level 1 and NIAP CCITSE. In related news, Groove's developers have been diagnosed with acronym whiplash."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by macshune (628296) on Monday March 15 2004, @10:53PM (#8575499) Journal
    Give the federal agency more MP3s!!! And the Justice Department can finally get quick access to pr0n so they can research it to help ban it!
    • by NotQuiteReal (608241) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:09PM (#8575599) Journal
      if it gets you really hot does that mean it's OK or extra bad?

      If it just disgusts you, is it porn or what?

      To paraphrase some supreme court justice or another, I can't tell you where I'd draw the line, but I'll tell you on a case by case basis, if you pay my normal hourly rates.

      • by Anonymous Coward
        if it gets you really hot does that mean it's OK or extra bad?

        Extra bad, I would guess.

        Similar to the torturers during the Spanish Inquisition who considered their own sexual arousal as they tortured naked female "witches" to be proof of the Devil's influence.
      • by JabberWokky (19442) <slashdot.com@timewarp.org> on Monday March 15 2004, @11:41PM (#8575800) Homepage Journal
        What do I see one day? A hit from the DOJ. They were looking for porno

        Holy CRAP! There are healthy *human* *beings* in the government? With the same urges and activities as in every other field? Call the news media!

        Seriously, working at a courthouse versus a finance company, I saw pretty much the same amount of people surfing porn from work. It's called being human. Not a big deal unless you happen to get called on it. That only happened once when the idiot started showing it to coworkers and HR got involved. Otherwise, anyone sitting on a router or proxy knows that there's a good deal of... err... personal internet use in every office.

        --
        Evan

  • Hold on... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15 2004, @10:55PM (#8575512)
    I thought p2p was evil and used only by terrorists. At least that's what the RIAA told me...
    • Re:Hold on... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by smitty_one_each (243267) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:03PM (#8575574) Homepage Journal
      No. I've used a demo of Groove, and it provides nice real-time groupware on modest hardware/bandwidth. It could be used to do quite a bit of good work, in the hands of sophisticated users. Oh, wait...
    • by bangular (736791) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:09PM (#8575601)
      In related news, all terrorist data has magically turned into porn, warez, and mp3's
    • Oh, come on, you mean you haven't seen the TV show where the Gummint tries use the evil, forbidden power to fight evil???? You must not receive the Fox network. :)

      In all seriousness, it is pretty impressive that Groove got their FIPS certification. My old company gave up once they saw all the hoops they would have had to jump though.
  • Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bl33d4merican (723119) on Monday March 15 2004, @10:55PM (#8575517)
    It's a very interesting idea that the govt. is considering P2P technology as a way to share information...what a turnaround from their RIAA-hand-holding policy. (Sure, I'm a little biased). But more importantly, despite these security measures, I wonder how insecure our data will be. And how many more government employees will have access to it. One things for sure, they'd better make damn sure this system is safe.
    • Re:Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tonyr60 (32153) * on Monday March 15 2004, @11:01PM (#8575556)
      From the linked page...

      "Groove jumps to Microsoft beat"

      Looking further, it is clear that Groove is comfortably in bed with Microsoft.

      So I am quite sure they will "make damn sure this system is safe".....
      • Re:Interesting (Score:4, Insightful)

        by galaga79 (307346) on Tuesday March 16 2004, @01:58AM (#8576262) Homepage
        Looking further, it is clear that Groove is comfortably in bed with Microsoft.

        I wouldn't say they are comfortably in bed with Microsoft, if anything their Groove Workspace product looks like a server less alternative to an Exchange. Just because their products integrate with the MS Office suite doesn't mean they are in bed with MS.
    • Yeah, well, FIPS 140-2 level 1 [rycombe.com] and NIAP CCITSE is nothing to sneeze at. Sensitive but not classified information. Standards-based encryption (of course), but no physical security measures like smartcards.
      • Re:Interesting (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Dashing Leech (688077) on Tuesday March 16 2004, @08:43AM (#8577498)
        HUH? What hand-holding policy?

        Well, let's see. There's the RIAA possibly having a big hand in writing California's policy [slashdot.org] on P2P. Then there's antitrust exemption [slashdot.org]. There's also the DMCA, which among other things give the RIAA the power to issue supoenas [com.com]. So I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest the government is "hand-holding".

        On the other hand, there are also many examples of Senators and Congressmen who oppose the RIAA approach and these laws. So it's not a black-and-white issue of where the government stands.

  • Ooohhh... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sr180 (700526) on Monday March 15 2004, @10:55PM (#8575520) Journal
    This will make it hard for the RIAA and MPAA to denounce p2p as evil now doesnt it?
    • Re:Ooohhh... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by kundor (757951) <kundor AT member DOT fsf DOT org> on Monday March 15 2004, @11:03PM (#8575573) Homepage
      Rationality has never stopped them before.

      Really, do you think the general public will hear or care about this or even connect it with the evil music swappers? I very much doubt it.

      • Re:Ooohhh... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 16 2004, @12:01AM (#8575905)
        Agreed, but this in now a formidable weapon in the courts when the RIAA/MPAA attack p2p saying the only uses for p2p are piracy and all others are negligible at best. If the US Homeland Defense people are into p2p the tech certainly has substantial non-infringing uses such that even a court could appreciate.

        So while the general public may not hear about it savvy EFF-type lawyers will invoke this and prevent injunctions,etc... as regards this incipient technology.

    • Re:Ooohhh... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by digitalvengeance (722523) * on Monday March 15 2004, @11:08PM (#8575595)
      No, it won't.

      90% of the american population will never equate this with "that song downloading MP3 thing" and the 10% that do already know enough to decide for themselves whether or not the MPAA/RIAA have a valid point or just pointless rhetoric.
  • by myownkidney (761203) on Monday March 15 2004, @10:57PM (#8575528) Homepage
    I wonder how long it will be before the RIAA takes DoJ to court.

    Or the DoJ might start investigating the underhand tactics RIAA has used to curtail P2P services.

    Either way, this is very good news.

  • I think it is a good idea because this way there will not need to be one central database. If my police station needed records from California they could just search and get it. It will also prove to the government that P2P programs are good and can often serve productive uses. Will medical records be next?
    • by Slashcrunch (626325) on Tuesday March 16 2004, @12:26AM (#8575993) Homepage
      But would I be able to download Britney Spears' latest medical records?
    • by tonywong (96839) on Tuesday March 16 2004, @12:27AM (#8575999) Homepage
      It's also a bad idea since there are many databases to be compromised. The government will have to make sure that everyone on the 'approved' list will be the only ones who have access to it, and it will be much more complicated to get a clean up to the moment audit trail for it.

      It also lends the possibility that the data can be corrupted by injecting false or spurious data into one host and everyone syncing up to/with it.

      Neither of these problems are insurmountable, but they should be examined carefully.
  • More information (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eddy (18759) on Monday March 15 2004, @10:58PM (#8575539) Homepage Journal

    (The initiative doesn't give the govt. more information, it just helps agencies better share the information they already have.)

    Surely a product of this process is more information?

    • by sammy baby (14909) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:04PM (#8575578) Journal
      And thus, the difference between data [reference.com] and synthesis [reference.com] was illustrated.
    • by Etrigan_696 (192479) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:25PM (#8575714)
      Have you ever done one of those "logic puzzles" you see in game/wordsearch/crossword magazines. You are told a story something like this.
      Bob, Mary and Jane went to the store. Each bought an item. One of them brought $.47 to spend, one brought $1.50 and one brought $.35. Bob didn't buy the popsicle. Jane didn't buy the bubble gum. Bob had less than $.50 to spend. The nachos one of them bought cost $1.29.
      Then you are given a chart that has each person's name on it, along with a list of the items and a list of the amounts of money brought to the store. Then you have to figure out who bought what, and how much money they started with. You aren't given enough information to answer straight away - you have to figure it out.
      Bringing all this information together (consider banking records, credit records, information gleaned through co-operative business (remember that supermarket "discount" card you signed up for?) forwarding addresses given to the post office, college records, income tax information - the list goes on) a decent computer app to display it all in a meaningful way, and a smart analyst to look at it, and they can figure out most anything about anyone.

      Big Brother never had it so good!

      And you say "bah - it's all public knowledge anyway. They can already find it out."
      and my response is this: Before, it was work. Before this, it cost money. Before this they had to have a reason to look at someone so closely. Now you go tickety-tickety-tick on the keyboard and blammo - you see that Mr. Johnson is apparantly feeling ill from the sushi he ate last night (from his credit report) because he bought some pepto bismol and OTC tagament from the supermarket (from the supermarket's customer tracking database - gotta love that discount card). But what's this? He took $300 out of the atm at 6pm, spent fifty at the grocery store, then took out another $300 at 9pm. This automated traffic camera places him in the seedy side of town at 11pm. What was he doing over there in the middle of the night with $550 in cash? Looks like we need to pay closer attention to Mr. Johnson.

      And yes - the terms and conditions papers from my bank when I opened my checking account said that "since 9/11 any large transactions (over $200) will be reported immediately to the department of homeland security".

      This is why the thought of a cashless society scares me.

      Now where's my typewriter and my compound in montana? I thought those things were standard to us luddite freaks...?
        • by djradon (105400) on Tuesday March 16 2004, @01:48AM (#8576238) Homepage Journal
          Jeff, you make a good point, but remember that in a democracy, the rights and viewpoints of minority groups are not always respected. A lot of people feel like prostitution should be legal, for example, and it is in parts of Nevada. But when a policeman in Utah sees that you got ticketed in a brothel, he might decide not to reduce your speeding ticket like he usually does, and then harass you.

          Admittedly, this is a frivolous example, but still, you're paying an extra hundred bucks just because the policeman knows something about you that's really none of his business.

          Technology, as well as law, can create problems because laws do not change quickly and the law is never perfect.

          For example, take the controversial "Red Light Cameras," which automatically ticket you if you go through an intersection. Obviously, the law has to say driving through a red light is illegal. But in a dynamic, high-traffic city like Los Angeles, people in left-turn lanes habitually run red lights to maximize efficiency.

          Or sometimes, late at night in a small town, you should be able to proceed through a red light if it is totally safe.

          And I won't even get into sex, and how in many states, two consenting adults cannot legally get it on just because they're gay.

          Point is, the law is never perfect. Until we can model perfect justice in neural networks (j/k) and eliminate corruption, we should maintain a healthy skepticism about "Total Information Awareness" as a dangerous concentration of power.

          And even if you had perfect faith in the government, like the poster above says, what if somebody hacks it? Or what if the good guys get kicked out and the bad guys take over?

  • P2P Piracy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by javester (260116) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:02PM (#8575558)
    Its a sad thing, but as the posts here points out, the association has stuck, and legitimate applications of P2P technology has suffered because of it.

    Look at how JXTA has been languishing for the past few years.

    Cmon folks, P2P is not piracy. It mirrors how distributed complex systems in nature behave and it has the potential to create dynamic, loosely-coupled distributed systems that may just get us out of this IT rut.
  • by Ars-Fartsica (166957) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:02PM (#8575563)
    What kind of data does the government need to be collaborating on in real time? Seems like the left hand not knowing what the right is doing.

    How does Groove archive data? Is there a centralized secure repository or is all of the data on client nodes, only as secure as that particular user chooses to be?

    Neat in a way, but it sounds like a mess for doing real work.

    • by $ASANY (705279) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:29PM (#8575739) Homepage
      No, Groove isn't practical at all. It's a bloated mess of crapola that allows message boarding, email, document collaboration and whiteboarding that sucks up every last bit of bandwidth in a black box system that can't share data with any other system but Groove. Homeland Security and a few intel agencies think this is Really Neat (tm), but it's a solution in search for a problem.

      First responders have radios. They work. Replacing those functional radios with laptops and forcing people to type (or draw low-res pictures) to each other is a complete waste. Data collection systems exist or are in development that understand that data requires analysis and evaluation. Groove treats everything as a free-for-all where nothing gets analysed, just thrown all over the place because it's the easiest thing to implement. Analysis requires thought, but throwing everything out there to inundate everyone with random garbage is just So Much Easier.

      I can almost guarantee that this is the usual marketing bullshit from BEA Systems (British Aerospace contactor that inexplicably has an in with U.S. Homeland Security) who has been peddling this crap for a few years now. Too stupid to develop custom solutions, they expertly peddle off-the-shelf stuff at a huge markup to glassy-eyed bureaucrats who get wowed because some Tablet PC can share data with some other Tablet PC without using ethernet cables. And it runs XP Tablet Edition version 1.0! Neato! Wanna see it reboot again?

      Some god-forsaken police or fire department leader is going to get saddled with yet another fraglie and tempermental piece of battery-dependent equipment that will serve only to force him to talk to higher-echelon bureaucrats instead of doing his job. I pray he'll have the sense to use it to extinguish a precise 12 inch by 18 inch portion of a conflagration where it will be far more functional than it's intended purpose.

    • yes, but now the left hand can not know what the right is doing in REAL time
  • file list (Score:5, Funny)

    by Cynikal (513328) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:02PM (#8575568) Homepage
    File: post-911-plans.doc (share or u will b... 192 KB
  • Many of you... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ieshan (409693) <ieshan&gmail,com> on Monday March 15 2004, @11:10PM (#8575606) Homepage Journal
    Many of you may know the founder of Groove (Ray Ozzie) as the guy who created Lotus Notes.

    Just showing that he's been in the spotlight before, it's not some random Joe who's suddenly found his product approved for Government use.
  • FIPS? (Score:3, Funny)

    by jx100 (453615) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:10PM (#8575607)
    What does the DHS need with really old partitioning software?
  • by blcamp (211756) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:11PM (#8575621) Homepage

    Dizzam, this is risky as hell.

    The Federales can't even protect thier friggin' nuclear research labs from 5cr1p7 k166195 hacking thier way in and having thier own way.

    Now, all of DHS is going to open up their entire information exchange apparatus to possible cyber-attacks, spoofing and God Knows What Else by a-Q and others?

    Nice.

    I don't think a-Q is going to be swapping any pr0n, unless you define it as putting fuses into hot boxes of combustible materiel.

  • Help, I hate groove! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Minna Kirai (624281) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:14PM (#8575638)
    I work with the DoD often, and am saddened to see them adopting Groove. (It's not just for Homeland Security either. Since Groove has been rubber-stamped as "secure" software, many other military/intel groups are using it)

    My dislike comes from two simple reasons: Groove is Windows-only, and Groove is non-free. (It's a paid product, not cheap, and the license enforcement is more effective than anything Microsoft Word has)

    If it were up to me, this wouldn't even be a concern: everyone would have Linux (or Mac OS X), there'd be no NATs blocking ports, and we'd all just share files via cvs or rsync (tunneled over ssh of course).

    Can anyone recommend a free competitor to Groove I can try to push on my Windows-using colleagues, before they get sucked into a proprietary protocol? I suspect the strongest advantage Groove has is it's ability to penetrate NAT (that and having been approved by Washington) "Free Software" would be prefered, but "free beer" is ok.
    • by Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:24PM (#8575706) Homepage
      My dislike comes from two simple reasons: Groove is Windows-only, and Groove is non-free. (It's a paid product, not cheap, and the license enforcement is more effective than anything Microsoft Word has)

      So the fact that it's a Windows product (Oh, last time I looked, there where still a lot of Windows users out there.), and they charge for it (Suprise, the GPL allows for charging for software too!), that's all you can come up with?

      How about the fact that it includes Windows DRM? Or that it's just another arm of the Borg? That it's probibly just as insecure as Windows?

      Ther is nothing wrong with charging for software, and nothing wrong with building apps for Windows.

      • by Minna Kirai (624281) on Tuesday March 16 2004, @01:56AM (#8576256)
        How about the fact that it includes Windows DRM? Or that it's just another arm of the Borg? That it's probibly just as insecure as Windows?

        Do you know how goofy you sound, dismissing my practical reasons and then spitting out stereotypical Slashbot-isms? And you ignored my most important reason, the lock-in to an undocumented protocol.

        By the way, Groove used to have a half-hearted Linux version [macadamian.com]. Wonder what happened to it...

        Ther is nothing wrong with charging for software, and nothing wrong with building apps for Windows.

        Ther is something wrong with charging a lot for software that does nothing I couldn't accomplish in an hour of python scripting around ssh. The needed functionality is so easy to achieve (since the tough part, the security, is handled by existing software) that chances are somebody else has already given away a free implementation. That's what I'm asking about.

        If I were inclined to touch Windows programming, I might do it myself...
  • by Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:15PM (#8575641) Homepage
    Isn't Groove a Microsoft project?

    From their web site: the company has obtained more than $155 million in financing from Accel Partners, Microsoft(R) Corporation

    Yup, this is P2P at it's best! With those kind of finantial backers, wonder what kind of DRM they push with each file served? Is it any wonder GWB and the folks at Homelad Security (and ain't that just a very Nazi sort of a name...) "choose" Groove?

    • by martinX (672498) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:39PM (#8575786)

      Since these documents are residing on the computers of federal, state, and local intelligence agencies, wouldn't you actually want some sort of Digital Rights Management to be used?

      This isn't some sort of government-sponsored MP3/mov fileserver for the public.

      BTW, A Nazi sort of name would be Homelandsicherheit.

  • by Maul (83993) on Monday March 15 2004, @11:35PM (#8575763) Journal
    Take that, Osama!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 16 2004, @12:05AM (#8575915)

    A system for sharing information between different agencies is not necessarily a reason to dig out the tin foil hats! Honestly!

    One of the major hassles as a government worker is that everyone has their own database and their own numbering system, and they don't necessarily share well. That's not referring to turf wars--that's just referring to the different systems. The FBI has their file numbers, the Department of Justice uses a different numbering system. And theoretically, the FBI is under the DOJ! HHS uses their own own numbering system, so does DCIS, etc. This is a major problem, especially when the investigative arms of different agencies are going after the same people.

    I spent some time as a paralegal for the DOJ, and one of my jobs was to check the status of older investigations and see what the result was or if they were still open. In many instances, it took weeks to track them down, because all I had was a FBI number and I needed the file from DCIS's investigation. Or I might have a DOJ number and need a file from the FBI... In both instances, they'd have to search by name, and that takes a very long time.

    I know very little about Groove Networks or how the technology works, but if it helps share information, it truly is a good thing. This is not a civil liberties issue--its an efficiency issue. The Government already has this data--this just lets them access it better.

    • by Phat_Tony (661117) on Tuesday March 16 2004, @01:32AM (#8576202) Homepage
      "The initiative doesn't give the govt. more information, it just helps agencies better share the information they already have."

      This does not make the new legislation harmless.

      Some branch or other of the government already has almost every scrap of information on you that they want. Coordinating it between departments that otherwise wouldn't have access to it can be just as scary as gathering too much information in the first place. This is mostly what Total Information Awareness was all about; sharing information.

      A particular danger associated with this is it's potential for facilitating the transition to "rule of men" instead of "rule of law" in this country.

      That is, almost everyone has something that's technically illegal in their backgrounds. Unpaid parking tickets, mistakes on taxes, an unpaid bill, or any of hundreds of little things. If you want to get really technical about it, there are kinds of flashlights that are illegal to have in conjunction with a firearm, there are outdated traffic laws that are widely unknown, always ignored, and never enforced, and for a while, Tryptophan, an amino acid essential to life, was illegal to possess in the US. There are elements of the tax code where it's illegal no matter how it's done, and throwing batteries in the trash can tecnically lead to huge fines and years in jail. If they want to put the information together and be picky enough to try to get someone, everyone can be gotten for somehting. Luckily, most of the silly stuff usually goes unenforced. But that doesn't mean it's not scary that, technically, we're all criminals.

      Allowing a variety of authorities- from police, sheriffs, & highway patrol, up to FBI and CIA, and down to your neighborhood precinct representative to have easy access to tons of information on you increases the possibility for selective enforcement of laws.

      Maybe the officials will use this information wisely to help track down big criminals, murderers, terrorists, etc. more effectively. Or maybe they'll use it to harass good people. Or maybe they'll even use their newfound power over everyone for extortion and blackmail.

      Be very wary of governments making sweeping or vague laws, and of classifying lots of things as illegal. Also be worried when they gather or consolidate information. I'll agree the information gathering's/access is potentially useful, and it's the overflow of laws and regulations that scares me much more. But the two in conjunction can be a dangerous combination.

  • Project IRIS? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by shadowmatter (734276) on Tuesday March 16 2004, @12:29AM (#8576004)
    This is strange. Through the NSF, the goverment is already pouring money into Project IRIS [project-iris.com], a collaboration of some of the best minds in true decentralized peer-to-peer architecture. It includes some of the creators of Chord (MIT), Pastry (Rice), and Kademlia (NYU) -- three of the fastest distributed hash table implementations out there (logarithmic time). So why are they investing in the Groove? Although I realize Microsoft has a well-staffed, well-funded research department (they were partly responsible for Pastry), it seems better to just pour more money into an already-going, well-researched project.

    - shadowmatter
  • Welcome to the Department of Justice P2P Network
    This is a Government Server
    **No Unauthorized Use**

    _Directories/Files Available
    __1. Emails Scanned
    __2. Active Cases
    __3. Cases on Hold
    __4. Wire Tap Transcripts
    __5. Satellite Photographs
    __6. Prisoners Incarcerated List
    __7. Archive Files
    __-----A. Old Files
    __-----B. Bob's Files **Top Secret**
    __----------1. Porn0 Pics
    __----------2. MP3 Files
    __----------3. Porn0 .avi files
    __----------4. Misc. Pics

    Hummmm . . . now where did I put that warez directory?

      • Re:First Block (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Motherfucking Shit (636021) on Tuesday March 16 2004, @01:52AM (#8576243) Journal
        Since someone else has already pointed out what the "crypt" is in technicality (part of a UUEncoded file), I'll tell you what it really is. It's proof that no amount of expanded or enhanced power on the government's part will ever make any of us safer from whatever Bogeyman we're worrying about today.

        <hypothetical>Suppose you're a terrorist, and you've just finished the final draft of the Secret Terrorism Plans. Now you need to distribute it to your cohorts. The problem is, "the man" is spying on all internet traffic, and you suspect they might even be able to crack PGP. How, then, can you possibly send a copy of the Secret Terrorism Plans to 18 of your closest friends without being caught?

        Easy, you bury it in shit.

        You take your Secret Terrorism Plans file and PGP-encrypt it, just for good measure. You then UUEncode the encrypted file, and split it into 10 chunks. Each chunk gets posted as a comment to a different Slashdot story. Somewhere out-of-band - or even in-band, say, as part of the previous message - you tell the recipients to start looking for parts of the file in the first Slashdot story with "Linux" in the story text on March 15th.

        Slashdot generates more than a million pageviews a day, with tens of stories and thousands of comments posted. Helpfully, your 10 UUEncoded chunks of the Secret Terrorism Plans are moderated -1, Troll, so that most people never even see them. Of those who do see them, most will ignore them, a few will wonder (as you did) what they are, fewer still will recognize that they're pieces of a UUEncoded file, and probably nobody will bother trying to track down all the parts and assemble them. Except for your intended recipients, that is.</hypothetical>

        Am I saying that Slashdot is a medium for terrorist communications? Of course not, though it's certainly possible. What I'm getting at - finally, straying on-topic - is that no amount of Groove, or P2P, or database crosschecking, or FBI wiretapping cable modems and DSL connections, is going to find the Secret Terrorism Plans. People coordinated enough to simultaneously take control of three airliners are not going to be sending around "Secret Terrorism Plans.doc" via email.

        IMO, Groove won't do any more to fight $BOGEYMAN than CAPPS or CAPPS II. It's just going to make it easier for "the man" to inconvenience the people who aren't doing anything wrong.