# DHS Internet Kill Switch



## Tactic12

Found this article. It's no Conspiracy Theory folks. Here's what a judge is looking into...

http://freepatriot.org/2013/11/14/i...orders-dhs-to-come-clean-on-killing-internet/


----------



## Fossil

And they wonder why folks hate this government...No surprise if true. I have noticed over the past year that the web is not quite the same as it used to be-very 'notchy' and unable to open several sites that I am sure are on a list the toadies keep handy. Ah well, let the pressure build a while.


----------



## Cast-Iron

Interesting post, Tactic12. This should help to make us all realize that we are only "allowed" to electronically communicate at the will of our Federal Communications Commission. If the government should ever find it in their best interest to intentionally keep us in the dark, they certainly have it in their capacity to quickly shut down any and all unwanted electronic communications (TV, radio, phones, internet, even ham radio). Something on my to do list has been to develop a set of contingency protocols for my immediate family members. A game plan if you will, so that we might independently operate more efficiently, effectively and cohesively in the event of nearly any potential crisis.


----------



## CulexPipiens

Cast-Iron said:


> Interesting post, Tactic12. This should help to make us all realize that we are only "allowed" to electronically communicate at the will of our Federal Communications Commission. If the government should ever find it in their best interest to intentionally keep us in the dark, they certainly have it in their capacity to quickly shut down any and all unwanted electronic communications (TV, radio, phones, internet, even ham radio). Something on my to do list has been to develop a set of contingency protocols for my immediate family members. A game plan if you will, so that we might independently operate more efficiently, effectively and cohesively in the event of nearly any potential crisis.


TV and Radio would be easier to shutdown as there aren't that many tranmission points... the internet, and since the phone system pretty much runs on a "version of the internet", was designed to withstand failures. Shutdowns look like failures and thus it would try to get around them. In the early days the internet mostly ran by IP numbers instead of all the www... names. The internet kill ability is mostly accomplished by stopping a few selected (name)servers that tranlate the www address back into IP numbers which is how the machines then communicate. As long as you know the IP of the server you want you'll probably still be able to communicate for quite awhile after the name servers are shutdown.

On a semi related note... at my office AT&T revealed to me that they want to meet with me to discuss migrating our existing analog class circuts over to digital IP circuits and that they have an internal goal of being all IP by 2020. What does this mean to you? As an analog circuit you have to effectively record the entire conversation when "listening in" like the NSA does. When the phone conversation has been converted to IP it's now packet data and you simply capture packets at will. Easier (relatively) to do, less equipment required and simpler to shutdown all phones too. If it's all IP traffic then at some point it's all crossing a few centralized very high end routers which would be pretty easy to tap/monitor/shut off.

Ham radio can't really be shut down... although it can be DFed (directional finding), which would let "them" pinpoint your location pretty quickly if it was legislatively shut down (i.e. banned). In this case, receiving would still be untraceable but transmitting is where the danger is. You'd have to be portable, short quick transmissions and then move, quickly, to a new location.

You know all those crackpot whack jobs that ran around telling us the government was spying on us from above and listening to all our calls... um, well... they were right!


----------



## Cast-Iron

CulexPipiens said:


> TV and Radio would be easier to shutdown as there aren't that many tranmission points... the internet, and since the phone system pretty much runs on a "version of the internet", was designed to withstand failures. Shutdowns look like failures and thus it would try to get around them. In the early days the internet mostly ran by IP numbers instead of all the http://www.preparedsociety.com/foru...22514/f5/dhs-internet-kill-switch-22514/www... names. The internet kill ability is mostly accomplished by stopping a few selected (name)servers that tranlate the www address back into IP numbers which is how the machines then communicate. As long as you know the IP of the server you want you'll probably still be able to communicate for quite awhile after the name servers are shutdown.
> 
> On a semi related note... at my office AT&T revealed to me that they want to meet with me to discuss migrating our existing analog class circuts over to digital IP circuits and that they have an internal goal of being all IP by 2020. What does this mean to you? As an analog circuit you have to effectively record the entire conversation when "listening in" like the NSA does. When the phone conversation has been converted to IP it's now packet data and you simply capture packets at will. Easier (relatively) to do, less equipment required and simpler to shutdown all phones too. If it's all IP traffic then at some point it's all crossing a few centralized very high end routers which would be pretty easy to tap/monitor/shut off.
> 
> Ham radio can't really be shut down... although it can be DFed (directional finding), which would let "them" pinpoint your location pretty quickly if it was legislatively shut down (i.e. banned). In this case, receiving would still be untraceable but transmitting is where the danger is. You'd have to be portable, short quick transmissions and then move, quickly, to a new location.
> 
> You know all those crackpot whack jobs that ran around telling us the government was spying on us from above and listening to all our calls... um, well... they were right!


You raise some good points. I guess my statement was too generalized so let me put it another way. I am not saying that there are any specific "kill switches" for the TV, radio, internet backbone, ham radio, or telephone. There are however, many methods for a resourceful individual to jam, disrupt, block or terminate the transmission of any analog or digital signals (_vhf, uhf, microwave, fiber optic, etc..._).
Such an event would likely never happen because, as we all have come to know, it's a significant source of electronic intelligence gathering for the N$A, the D!A, and the FB! (_and in all likelihood other unnamed and unknown highly classified agencies_). You're kidding yourself if you don't realize that every electronic technology has inherent vulnerabilities which can be (_and often are_) easily exploited.


----------



## mosquitomountainman

Cast-Iron said:


> You raise some good points. I guess my statement was too generalized so let me put it another way. I am not saying that there are any specific "kill switches" for the TV, radio, internet backbone, ham radio, or telephone. There are however, many methods for a resourceful individual to jam, disrupt, block or terminate the transmission of any analog or digital signals (_vhf, uhf, microwave, fiber optic, etc..._).
> Such an event would likely would never happen because, as we all have come to know, it's a significant source of electronic intelligence gathering for the N$A, the D!A, and the FB! (_and in all likelihood other unnamed and unknown highly classified agencies_). You're kidding yourself if you don't realize that every electronic technology has inherent vulnerabilities which can be (_and often are_) easily exploited.


In that case maybe people should be looking into some type of encryption?


----------



## Cast-Iron

mosquitomountainman said:


> In that case maybe people should be looking into some type of encryption?


I'm no expert in encryption, but recent disclosures by the accused N$A leaker, Edward Snowden, allege that many encryption programs have already been compromised and aren't as secure as you might think. I would still prefer encrypted versus non-encrypted, just assume that big brother can or may decode these at will.


----------



## CulexPipiens

Cast-Iron said:


> ...Such an event would likely would never happen because, as we all have come to know, it's a significant source of electronic intelligence gathering for the N$A, the D!A, and the FB! (_and in all likelihood other unnamed and unknown highly classified agencies_). You're kidding yourself if you don't realize that every electronic technology has inherent vulnerabilities which can be (_and often are_) easily exploited.


That is a good point. I could see legistlatively they may ban certain activites or discussions, but outright shutting it down would hamper data collection. Of course by then they'll know us better then our families do.


----------



## CulexPipiens

Cast-Iron said:


> I'm no expert in encryption, but recent disclosures by the accused N$A leaker, Edward Snowden, allege that many encryption programs have already been compromised and aren't as secure as you might think. I would still prefer encrypted versus non-encrypted, just assume that big brother can or may decode these at will.


There are a few ways to compromise encryption. If a back door is built in and/or there is a special "key" that allows them to auto decrypt, then it is indeed useless. On the other hand, if it's just because they have so many computers that they can simply brute force hack through any encryption in a relative short period of time then encryption is still useful... but only if widely used.

Let's say unecrypted they can auto-read a thousand emails a second. However with encryption it takes 5 seconds to decode that message before they can read it. So, in 5 seconds they view 5,000 or they view 1.

Now, think if everyone used encryption. They'd have to scale up the flaming data center in Utah by a factor of 5000 to be able to keep up. Again, let's say that we're encrypting everything... currently if it's encrypted I would think it's more suspicious. When everything is encrypted they're pouring massive computing power into decoding your email with pictures of cats doing cute stuff. A lot of wasted resources for no payback.


----------



## Cast-Iron

Excellent point and well articulated CP!


----------



## Caribou

CulexPipiens said:


> Let's say unecrypted they can auto-read a thousand emails a second. However with encryption it takes 5 seconds to decode that message before they can read it. So, in 5 seconds they view 5,000 or they view 1.
> 
> Now, think if everyone used encryption. They'd have to scale up the flaming data center in Utah by a factor of 5000 to be able to keep up. Again, let's say that we're encrypting everything... currently if it's encrypted I would think it's more suspicious. When everything is encrypted they're pouring massive computing power into decoding your email with pictures of cats doing cute stuff. A lot of wasted resources for no payback.


I like this idea. I use a similar plan with my shredder. Shredded paper is usually a wealth of information about someones personal information. I shred everything from junk mail on up. Someone that wants my information are going to have to a lot of patience. I use a cross cut shredder.

Burning would be more secure but that is impractical at my current residence.


----------



## BillS

Well, it's nice if everyone uses encryption but I wouldn't use it until then. Imagine how high your threat rating goes if you're sending encrypted emails that the NSA can't crack.


----------



## BillS

Speaking of threat assessment, it's also not a good idea to come out in favor of armed insurrection if you don't want to rise to the top of the terminate list.


----------



## PrepN4Good

So...should we all start learning how to raise carrier pigeons...?


----------



## BillM

*In the event*

In the event that the switch is thrown before we expect it to happen, good by everybody.

It has been a pleasure to know you on the forum !


----------



## Cast-Iron

PrepN4Good said:


> So...should we all start learning how to raise carrier pigeons...?


Mmmmmmm! Dinner and a message. Squab anyone?


----------



## CulexPipiens

PrepN4Good said:


> So...should we all start learning how to raise carrier pigeons...?


Look for other methods of communicating... or communicating without obviously doing so. When we were kids I'm willing to bet that most of us tried writing secret messages with lemon juice. Use the same concept in the electronic age.

Here is one possible method: https://guardianproject.info/apps/pixelknot/ "_The practice of embedding secret messages into a piece of media so that no one, apart from the sender and intended recipient, know that the secret message exists._"

Now the encrypted email that contains a picture of the cute kitten actually has an AES encrypted message embedded within the picture itself. Layers on layers.


----------



## frankd4

*IPSEC encryption*

Go to the help function in Windows and type IPSEC it will tell you how to set up encryption between two or more stations and you can also encrypt your hard drive, also unplug your computer at night so they can't use wake on lan while your sleeping to suck down your data.


----------



## cqp33

Dont keep anything on a computer hooked to the internet! I have a laptop that I don't connect to the internet, older version with the network card removed, still has a USB port to put documents on it or take them off if needed but it is never connected to the web, PERIOD! That is where I keep all my PDF files of homesteading items I want to have if SHTF but of course an EMP would fry that bad boy though! Just saying!


----------



## CulexPipiens

Cast-Iron said:


> Mmmmmmm! Dinner and a message. Squab anyone?


Hey! Didn't you ever hear of "Don't kill the messenger!" ?


----------



## helicopter5472

CulexPipiens said:


> Hey! Didn't you ever hear of "Don't kill the messenger!" ?


Yea but you know the "ZOMBIE" part will take over and it's bye, bye, birdie


----------



## CulexPipiens

helicopter5472 said:


> Yea but you know the "ZOMBIE" part will take over and it's bye, bye, birdie


But zombies don't usually have the motor skills necessary to get at the BRAINS in such a small skull. One wrong move and the head pops off, rolls away and they lose their snack.


----------



## RevWC

PrepN4Good said:


> So...should we all start learning how to raise carrier pigeons...?


I have a friend that was connected to an Italian group and they used Pigeons to communicate.


----------



## BillS

To get back to the original post, it really doesn't matter what the law is. Obama will ignore it when he sees fit to do so.


----------



## Geek999

If he turns off the Internet, nobody will be able to sign up for Obamacare! Oh, I forgot, no one can sign up for it now!


----------



## hiwall

Why create a switch if you don't plan on using it?
The obvious answer is Yes they plan on using it.


----------

