Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States The Internet Technology

Dept. Of Homeland Security Chooses Groove, P2P 239

Posted by timothy 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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dept. Of Homeland Security Chooses Groove, P2P More

Dept. Of Homeland Security Chooses Groove, P2P

Comments Filter:

  • It does, however... (Score:5, Funny)

    by macshune ( 628296 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @11:53PM (#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!

    • So, while researching porn... (Score:5, Funny)

      by NotQuiteReal ( 608241 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:09AM (#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.

      • Re:So, while researching porn... (Score:3, Interesting)

        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.

    • Re:It does, however... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by boobsea ( 728173 )
      And the Justice Department can finally get quick access to pr0n so they can research it to help ban it

      This isn't a joke. Its true.

      I used to have a small webserver hosted off of my cable modem. I had a collection of "funny pictures". They were not ponrographic in nature, but there were a few words in some of the filenames that could be construted as porn in a different context.

      What do I see one day? A hit from the DOJ. They were looking for porno (a specific set of keywords, I dont remember, but it was a

      • Re:It does, however... (Score:5, Informative)

        by JabberWokky ( 19442 ) <slashdot.com@timewarp.org> on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:41AM (#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

        • Well, that explains both the lawyers and the accountants I've met.

        • Ah yes... I fondly remember the "Tattler" and the frantic calls, "I was searching for cheaper notepads and ended up on a porn site! I swear to god I didn't mean to! Do I get reported to my boss for this?" My usual response was, "Don't worry, I'll take care of it for you." Translation: "nobody looks at that thing unless they're looking for an excuse to fire you, and then you're screwed anyway."

        • It's called being human.

          No, in this particular case, it's called "looking for illegal kiddie porn."

          I personally have no problem with federal agents downloading porn for personal use, but Washington is full of high officials and congresspeople who are much less tolerant. No sane DOJ employee is going to use his or her official workstation for that kind of recreational browsing. Not worth the risks. So if you get a hit on a porn link from a DOJ address, you can be quite sure it's not a recreational interes

          • No sane DOJ employee is going to use his or her official workstation for that kind of recreational browsing. Not worth the risks. So if you get a hit on a porn link from a DOJ address, you can be quite sure it's not a recreational interest!

            Wrong. There are loads of people within both local law enforcement and the federal government and DOJ who surf porn. Hell, I personally know for a fact that the beltway also has issues with P2P mp3 sharing, adware, spyware, viruses and all sorts of other typical IT is

          • Re:It does, however... (Score:3, Insightful)

            by hesiod ( 111176 )
            > No sane DOJ employee is going to use his or her official workstation for that kind of recreational browsing. Not worth the risks

            Have you ever actually held a government job? It would take a whole lot more than downloading occasional porn to have any risk of being fired.

  • Hold on... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15, 2004 @11:55PM (#8575512)
    I thought p2p was evil and used only by terrorists. At least that's what the RIAA told me...

  • Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bl33d4merican ( 723119 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @11:55PM (#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 Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:01AM (#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:2, Interesting)

      by pair-a-noyd ( 594371 )
      You can rest assured that this will leak like a screen door on a submarine. With most of the people in the gubmint being absolute morons, someone will "leave a door unlocked" somewhere and some punk script kiddie will hack it 6 ways to sunday.

      Even if it does manage to stay secure, what a comforting thought that your entire life is flowing through the MATRIX for every fuckstick with a hard on for you to look at.

      When you political beliefs are common knowledge and readily available to those that have the po

      • Re:Interesting (Score:3, Insightful)

        by k_head ( 754277 )
        Yea life must be real tought for a wingnut like you but be thankful you are not a muslim.
      • With many of the gubmint workers being of the liberal/demoncratic persuasion...

        whaaaaa?!! oh, sorry you must live in Spain [bbc.co.uk].

      • Re:Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)

        by bomblaster ( 580308 )
        Maybe you should take some time to understand the product before making lame-assed comments. Groove is a groupware product first and foremost. P2P is just the method by which Grrove users exchange information. Secondly, it is not like Kazaa where just about anyone has access to your shared files. Instead, users form workgroups to share information (documents and other files). Think peer workgroups. Thirdly, it is fully encrypted end-to-end. Somebody might hack your machine, but wont be able to read your

    • Re:Interesting (Score:3, Informative)

      by normal_guy ( 676813 )
      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.

    • To quote the summary:

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

      Does anybody besides me seem to recall that the whole point of our Republican form of government was to keep government divided and separate? Sure this may not give them any more information but I don't think tightly integrating my local or state government into Federal government is a good thing. Divided government is good. Have people forgotten this?

  • Ooohhh... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sr180 ( 700526 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @11:55PM (#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.member@fsf@org> on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:03AM (#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.

      • The only thing I'm wondering is what name they're going to use to distance themselves from P2P. MATRIX is taken, so maybe Fellowship of the Anti-Terrorists...

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

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @01:01AM (#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 Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:08AM (#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.
    • Not to veer dangerously offtopic in a slashdot post, but I would be very happy if the P2P filesharing networks were shut down, and research focused instead on other, better uses for P2P.

      Bittorrent, for one example. A distributed website distribution system, that would make sites go faster the more people reading them, for another. In this case, a distributed resource network for sharing data amongst spooks. Another would be a decentralized network file server using the famous 1-2, 2-3, 3-1 file transfer
      • that's kinda the whole point.
        RIAA says that P2P is only for bad evil traders and pirates and goes after the technology creators of the P2P software.
        We always said, hey, there are good uses for the technology other than pirating mp3's we just can't think of any right now, but regardless, creating the software shouldn't be a crime, using it to commit a crime is, but having it or creating it isn't.
        Riaa says, nonsense, it's a crime as there are no real reasons other than piracy to have p2p software.
        DOJ says we

  • Friend of a friend is... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    So does this mean that the MPAA/RIAA will be after them?

  • RIAA vs. DoJ (Score:4, Funny)

    by myownkidney ( 761203 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @11:57PM (#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.

  • Well that Tom Ridge had a good idea (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LinuxBSDNotSCO ( 738941 ) <mgidding@gmail.com> on Monday March 15, 2004 @11:58PM (#8575538) Homepage
    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?

  • More information (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eddy ( 18759 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @11:58PM (#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?

    • Re:More information (Score:4, Insightful)

      by sammy baby ( 14909 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:04AM (#8575578) Journal
      And thus, the difference between data [reference.com] and synthesis [reference.com] was illustrated.

    • No - Meta Information (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Etrigan_696 ( 192479 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:25AM (#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...?
      • When will every single big brother horror story not end in 'and thats how they caught him with the cocaine and heroin' or 'and thats how they caught him speeding' or 'thats how they caught him paying blackmail money to the gay brothel'? Honestly with every account i hear about the governments new way to catch tax evaders or rapists through information networks i think 'Yay! less criminals'. The problem with big brother isnt that he's there, its that he has more than just the power to see into your living

        • Re:No - Meta Information (Score:5, Interesting)

          by djradon ( 105400 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @02:48AM (#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?

  • Because there aren't already enough government computers and agencies that don't understand file sharing and how not to leave their files on network shaes for all to see [reuters.com]. At least now maybe the republicans will have a more standard and powerful search app that crossreferencs more machines than having to resort to going into "My Network Places" and just randomly clicking along to access other peoples personal files.
  • ...about pr0n going around those evil P2P networks.

    We wouldn't want the AG catching you trading Paris Hilton pics around those government networks, would we...

  • P2P Piracy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by javester ( 260116 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:02AM (#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.

  • Groove - neat, but practical? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:02AM (#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.

    • If every single department shared their information with every other department, wouldn't there be information overload? I don't think bandwidth is infinite...and even if it was, the people are still human and can only process so much information at a time. If P2P is implemented on a department-by-department basis, information overload will be reduced, but some of the benefits (e.g. increased collaboration) will be negated. Ditto if P2P is implemented on even smaller scales (sub-department). If I recall c

    • Re:Groove - neat, but practical? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by $ASANY ( 705279 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:29AM (#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.

      • 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.

        The uses won't be nearly as ambitious. They won't push it that far. It'll serve as nothing more than a propaganda-pusher for the DHS. Each Friday at 16:00 the chief will spend a few minutes seeing what new and informative safety hints [ready.gov] the feds have stuffed
    • yes, but now the left hand can not know what the right is doing in REAL time
    • Neat in a way, but it sounds like a mess for doing real work.
      It is. About a year ago I tried to use Groove to collaborate on a project with some other people that were geographically dispersed. Groove is able to hook into MS Word and allow several people to collaboraively edit a document.

      To cut a long story short, it was completely and utterly unusable. After a few weeks we ditched Groove and went back to using email and IRC.

  • file list (Score:5, Funny)

    by Cynikal ( 513328 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:02AM (#8575568) Homepage
    File: post-911-plans.doc (share or u will b... 192 KB

  • Many of you... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ieshan ( 409693 ) <ieshan@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:10AM (#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 Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:10AM (#8575607)
    What does the DHS need with really old partitioning software?

  • Public P2P Infrastructure? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by blcamp ( 211756 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:11AM (#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 Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:14AM (#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.

    • Re:Help, I hate groove! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Saeed al-Sahaf ( 665390 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:24AM (#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.

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

        by Minna Kirai ( 624281 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @02:56AM (#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...

        • that does nothing I couldn't accomplish in an hour of python scripting around ssh

          and

          I were inclined to touch Windows programming, I might do it myself...

          So get off your high-horse and put your code where your mouth is. Go create a competing product and sell it to the government for half of what Groove charges.

    • Lets see you dislike it because it's not free, not cheap and the "license enforcement is more effective than anything Microsoft Word has."

      Hmmm...in other words, you're pissed you can't pirate it. If security is the higher priority, it seems like they're doing a decent job stopping you. And if you regularly pirate software to use on government contracts, I'm happy they're locking you out.

      • And if you regularly pirate software to use on government contracts, I'm happy they're locking you out.

        Of course I never "pirate" software, I can hardly swim. And I don't infringe software copyrights either, as should've been evident by my attachment to "Free" distributions. But it's not up to me, it's up to the Pentagon LTs and CLs who carry the authority on these things.

        The government IT people just can't handle license keys satisfactorily.

        It's not the money... it's the actual holding onto the keys

  • Take a look under the hood. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Saeed al-Sahaf ( 665390 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:15AM (#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?

    • Re:Take a look under the hood. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by martinX ( 672498 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:39AM (#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.

    • MS paid a bunch of money to license groove, they were suppose to add alot of groove functionality into ms-office.
      this was around 3-4 years ago have not kept up with the latest developments.

  • Hah! Wait until they start capping upload speeds. (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Don't worry, they'll start turning down upload speeds and "HOTINVESTIGATION_OSAMA_BIN_LADEN_FILM.avi.exe" will be everywhere. Not to mention that those cunts at the FBI like to cancel the uploads at 99%, fucking babies.

  • I just downloaded tons of MP3s off of Kazaa! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Maul ( 83993 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @12:35AM (#8575763) Journal
    Take that, Osama!

  • And now we know why Mitch left (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    He said he couldn't work for a company with such a gov't. contract. Good for him!
  • http://news.com.com/2100-1012-5172310.html

  • Hrm... (Score:2, Funny)

    by a1cypher ( 619776 )
    Will they release a "Groove P2P lite" that will allow me to login and track who is downloading my info?
    And then I can start random lawsuits suing people for downloading my personal info without paying me royalties...

    Oh wait... sounds vaguely fammilliar...

    1) Post private personal info on Kazaa
    2) Start a bunch of lawsuits
    3) ????
    4) Profit!!!

  • Centralized is not automatically bad (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @01:05AM (#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.

    • Re:Centralized is not automatically bad (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Phat_Tony ( 661117 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @02:32AM (#8576202)
      "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 @01:29AM (#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

  • DOJ P2P File Structure (Score:5, Funny)

    by Newt-dog ( 528340 ) <newt-dog@phantom ... om minus painter> on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @02:41AM (#8576224) Homepage
    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?

  • You know what's really weird.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ziggy_zero ( 462010 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @04:18AM (#8576447)
    Awhile ago my friend and I formed a band (that only lasted for a few weeks) and we called it..."The Department of Homeland Groove". I thought it was catchy.

    And now it actually makes sense.
  • I .... I thought P2P is evil? For pirating and stuff? I sure hope that the RIAA won't go and shut down the Dept. Of Homeland Security ... ohhh ... the confusion ... hurts ...

  • Ridge said this homeland security network had helped officials determine that terrorism wasn't the likely cause of last year's blackout, and has been the cornerstone of efforts to protect national monuments, and secure holiday celebrations and special events, such as the Super Bowl and New Year's Eve celebrations.

    Oh really? The way the media has been buzzing about, I'd gotten the idea that there was a terrorist act at the Super Bowl... something about a warhead malfunction or something?

  • Can't see either,

    A) Source code, or

    B) Linux/Debian/U*nix versions

    This is a closed source Microsoft Windows 98/NT/2000/ME/XP pure play.

    Have these idiots actually learnt anything about security and monocultures ?.

    • It is very unlikely that they have the ability to understand the difference between specification and implementation. This is true, even for many people in the open source community if we just remember what happened when openssl had a security hole last year we see this was also a monoculture.

      Choosing monoculture means that paying less (money, time, compatibility) in the normal case is more important then limiting the damage done in the special case. While choosing many different implementations means payi
  • ...p2p is a terrorist tool! I thought there was even a US secretary general or something who warned of the evil of p2p? Wasn't this the tool of the devil which helped distribute child porn and mp3's? WHAT IS THE GOV'T THINKING!!!???

  • p2p in government (Score:3, Interesting)

    by griann ( 557426 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @09:26AM (#8577384)
    Since the MPAA and the RIAA seem to have been attempting to demonise the very nature of P2P networking as, somehow, innately bad (rather than the specific instances in which individual users may have used the technologies for less than legal ends), this might very well act as a wake up call that a technology is, in itself, not an appropriate target for a moral, ethical or legal crusade.

    A technology is purely a means for achieving any number of ends. The specific ends for which it is used are individual and not directly the responsibility nor the scope of that technology.

    The specific uses it is employed for are the issue for anyone taking offence at the incursions on their business model.

    That the government is using that very same technology as a means to counter terrorism will make their rhetoric much more difficult to promote. Instantly any question of "how could this technology be used excapt for illegal purposes?" has been answered and with resounding implications for the security of the nation.

    Deal with the specific actions. Don't try to suppress the technology.

    Perhaps its adoption by the Department of Homeland Security will, once and for all, demonstrate that there are legitimate uses for the technology.

    By extension, perhaps this will also serve to undermine the RIAA and MPAA's rhetoric that they have some sort of right to monitor the private communications of citizens using this technology.

    Perhaps the Department of Homeland Security has genuinely made a move which will uphold the privacy rights of its own citizens.

    Maybe I'm a rose coloured glasses type of idealist or a romantic, but I'd like to think so.

  • Where have I seen this before? (Score:3, Informative)

    by dgenr8 ( 9462 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2004 @10:15AM (#8577695) Journal

    Where have I seen this before... a groupware platform built on required client software that costs money, and proprietary protocols? Ah yes, it was Mr. Ozzie's last invention, Lotus Notes. But this time, we also get to share our identities with the rest of the Groove network.

    Notes is a case study in how proprietary groupware is doomed to lose out to standards. The same will happen with Groove.

    As a recent piece opined, "the only thing harder than using Notes is getting rid of it [eweek.com]"

    And it seems to be true. InfoWorld's own CEO gave up [infoworld.com] his attmpt to get rid of Notes. Won't that make it difficult to migrate to Groove?

    Here's a glimmer of hope for anyone still roped to Notes. At my company we have 200 of 450 desktops converted from Notes mail to Thunderbird/Sendmail/OpenLDAP and most of the rest will be done this week. Mainly, all it took was perseverance.

    It's too bad Ozzie couldn't find a way to make Groove open and still make money.

Slashdot Top Deals

To do nothing is to be nothing.

Close