File sharers leak government secrets

Summary: Government employees who handle sensitive information should not be installing file sharing software. But they are. And that information is readily available for anyone to look up.

Sensitive files including Secret Service safehouse locations, military rosters, and IRS tax returns can still be found on file-sharing networks, according to a report issued to a U.S. House of Representatives committee on Wednesday.

In many cases, that's because federal government employees or contractors installed peer-to-peer software on their computers without paying attention to which documents would be shared, Robert Boback, the chief executive of Tiversa, told the panel.

Boback said his company found the Secret Service's evacuation plans for the first lady and motorcade routes. (See an interview with Tiversa about Marine One documents found on a peer-to-peer network this spring.)

That led some politicians to announce that new federal laws were necessary to stop inadvertent file sharing.

"I'm planning to introduce a bill," said Rep. Edolphus Towns, a New York Democrat who heads a House oversight committee. He said his legislation would limit the use of peer-to-peer software on all computer networks operated by the federal government or its contractors.

In addition, the Federal Trade Commission should investigate whether P2P software developers are violating the law, and the Obama administration should "undertake a national campaign to educate consumers about the dangers of file-sharing software," Towns said. (In April, Towns' committee informed the FTC it had reopened an investigation into inadvertent file sharing.)

Rep. Peter Welch, a Vermont Democrat, suggested a similar approach. He wanted to know "whether there's some legal action that should be taken to protect intellectual property, to protect kids from pornography, to protect classified medical information, national security information."

The two-and-a-half hour hearing singled out LimeWire, which is probably the highest-profile P2P client in use today. LimeWire is distributed by Manhattan-based Lime Wire LLC (which sells a more featureful version called LimeWire Pro) and it uses the BitTorrent and Gnutella networks.

Lime Group chairman Mark Gorton tried to defuse some of the criticism, saying "the current version of LimeWire does not share any documents by default," and many security improvements were added in version 5 of the software -- released in December 2008 -- that were absent from version 4.

Gorton also tried to make a more subtle point: the Gnutella network is an amalgamation of scores of different P2P clients, many of which may have different default settings, and LimeWire shouldn't be held responsible for someone's decision to share files using a program written by a different company.

It didn't work. "It is chilling what the public now has available to it," Rep. Towns said. "The idea that you can look at the first lady's information, where she's going, how she's getting there, tax records, things of that nature. ... we need to get to the bottom of this."

Not helping was the fact that Gorton testified at an earlier hearing in July 2007 on the same topic.

"Mr. Gorton, I find your testimony today stunning," said Rep. Paul Hodes, a New Hampshire Democrat. "You promised us two years ago you were going to fix LimeWire."

Replied Gorton: "LimeWire does not control the computers of people around the country."

He added later: "It's not unreasonable to expect that people who install file-sharing software want to share files."

Other suggestions were more extreme. Rep. Bill Foster, an Illinois Democrat who's more technically-inclined than most politicians (he has a doctorate in physics), said that "the nuclear option is to block the Gnutella protocol" on a national basis.

But, Foster acknowledged, that wasn't likely to work. Another option, he said, would be to create a new version of the Gnutella protocol that allowed only limited clients -- that curbed what folders or filetypes could be shared -- to connect to it.

This article was originally posted on CBS News.

Topics: Software, Browser, Government, Government US

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

49 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Securing a network...

    is a very simple task. However, it does require that the administrator(s) actually be qualified and knowledgeable about their profession. During my 20 years in the technology profession it has become quite obvious that maybe 2 out of 10 professionals are actually qualified to be called professionals. This is why there is so much compromised data and why so many IT projects fail.

    They can pass all the legislation they want to but it will not make sensitive data any more secure. Unless the legislation was stringent requirements to get into the IT profession.
    bjbrock
    • Amen. And the US Govt uses lowest bid

      contractors and low-paid staffers, so they get a pretty low quality of security as a result.
      terry flores
    • Agree

      I totally agree. Private companies have no problems controlling this, from both a management and tech approach. This is an epic failure on the part of the government's IT folks. The responsibility here should not lay on the P2P apps/networks. This are arguable legit and much less harmless when use personally, but have no place in any office. But such as human nature, people CANNOT take responsibility for their own actions, so a scapegoat must be blamed, and in this case it is Limewire. Awesome!
      djmik
    • I second that........

      The basics of network security were bypassed completely. I am embarrassed that our government is so stupid. People wonder why I don't trust them to do much of anything and this just puts a rubber stamp on that thought.

      Second I can't believe they blame limewire for this. Complete twilight zone moment right there. No don't blame the sys admin or the idiot that installed it, blame limewire, thats the ticket. Politicians are dumber than a box of rocks and we seriously need a complete clean slate of common sense individuals to take their place. FAIL all over this.
      OhTheHumanity
      • I agree

        It's no ones fault but the people that installed
        it on there computer and made files available to
        share, and their system administrators for not controlling it.

        How dumb of a situation
        ingramproductions
        • Yep . . .

          If people keep hitting themselves with hammers, don't blame one manufacturer of one brand of hammer!
          sporkfighter
      • I take issue with one point ...

        "Politicians are dumber than a box of rocks and we seriously need a complete clean slate of common sense individuals to take their place."

        I've met many politicians over the years, and most of them are smart, or at least cunning. If you want to point a finger at dummies, then point it at us, the citizens who voted for them.
        terry flores
        • True.....

          But sometimes you have no choice but to vote for a worthless candidate. As we all know its hard to break the cycles in politics. I think maybe they aren't dumb, but they act like they know things they really do not know which in turn makes them look dumb.
          OhTheHumanity
        • Agreed.

          We voted them in... We should be able to vote 'em out (unless you believe the conspiracy theories of vote fixing made easier by the new electronic voting.) They are smart and cunning, but out of touch with reality as we citizens contact it. They have aids and others who do most of their computer work, so they haven't bothered to LEARN the real ins and outs. Yepp, they're sly and cunning, AND just about as greedy as any CEO, CIO, CTO, etc. out there. Sadly the good ones don't seem to get as far as they should.

          Hey, the media cartels who have offered incentives to them blame the P2P networks for their losses... easy direction to go. Ignore the fact that there are about as many ligit uses for P2P as there is illegal.
          DaemonSlayer
    • It also takes the . . .

      . . . balls to say "No!" to everyone using the network, form the mail-room flunky to the CEO.
      sporkfighter
  • And STILL people whine and complain about DRM!

    If those files had been rights-restricted, unauthorized viewing would have been prevented.

    When you want to control who can read your data, DRM-it! (I should trademark that ;))

    Sigh.
    de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023
    • If by DRM, you meant encryption, then yes.

      But DRM as a generic information security tool is a joke, especially for text-based information. DRM barely works for mass-distributed files where the files were intended for distribution. It doesn't prevent intelligence-gathering from files that weren't intended for wide distribution in the first place.
      terry flores
    • Dumb, Ridiculous Moron

      DRM must go. One way or another people will share whatever they want.
      KrazdKiller
    • Your confused this content is not DRM

      DRM has nothing to do with something that is not intended for mass distribution. Got it this is private not distributed content. You must mean encryption not DRM.
      Altotus
  • Just wait

    'til the first leaks come out of Google. They have more information about more people than anybody. It will happen!
    jorjitop
  • Ya kiddin me, Right?

    Ever heard of virtual girl?

    Isn't it assumed that if someone downloads and installs virtual girl they're exposing their computer to media of an adult nature? Does anyone go after the developers of Virtual Girl? Nope! That person is usually fired on the spot!

    This is the same way Lime Wire shouldn't be held responsible for the ignorance of those that choose to use it at work and to make matters worse in a secure environment where classified data is being handled! The article didn't even touch upon the possibility that the person is using lime wire to steal copyrighted media for free. If this were to happen in my future company this would result in 0 tolerance disciplinary action. You may as well have been caught selling proprietary data to one of my competitors because of this complete disregard for anyone other than self. This all could be avoided by simply joining iTunes, Rhapsody or even Napster and paying for the DRM license to enjoy the media on your home computer that isn't ever used to process company data. Is that so difficult?

    To consider legal action against Lime Wire for the abusive actions of their employees is a gross misjudgment and possibly a pure waste of tax dollars.

    How many of those users who've installed Lime Wire on their work computers had even taken the time to read the EULA and Privacy Policy regarding that software? I bet it's maybe one and I bet that one person hasn't read it in it's entirety or at least the important titles such as 'terms of use' and 'the collection and use of private (or personal) data'.

    There's a time and place for everything and at the end of the day they should be terminated. They've violated the terms of their clearance and should pay the consequences for their actions.

    That's my opinion!
    fixmedoc
  • RE: File sharing leaks government secrets

    yeah we should sock'em over the head with a bag of bricks!

    Really I think it's a bullsh*t scheme to get some other legislation passed or accept some kind of money from the multi-media industry.
    fixmedoc
    • ditto

      I agree. Those politicians are not dumb, they are using this incident as an ammunition to serve their RIAA master.
      weehee
  • RE: File sharing leaks government secrets

    Or at least PGP it.
    fixmedoc
  • It is easy to throw stones...

    It is easy to throw stones at the government when you don't understand what is really going on. First, very few of these data leaks are because of the acts of government employees. The culprit are the contractors whom congress claims knows better than the government.

    If you do not like that the government hires contractors or accepts the lowest bid, blame congress. They created the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) the tells the agencies how to do a procurement.

    But why are the agencies hiring contractors? Because congress tells them to do so. Congress critters with special interest in creating jobs in their districts tell the agencies to contract out the work in hopes that their district can reap those benefits. This way, when they come up for re-election, they can say, "look what I did for you." In the mean time, the government agency has to clean up after their failures.

    Further, because these contractors underbid on these contracts hoping to secure them and then bombard the government with Change Requests do not hire Americans to do the work. They hire foreign nationals with green cards at a price less than you would take in order to keep payroll costs down. These foreign nationals do not have the same background or sensibilities of an American-born worker. They also don't have the same knowledge or experience. But they work cheap and they can be milked for a lot of time while the contractor keeps billing.

    What can the government do about it? NOTHING! Congress created the laws that prevents the agencies from doing much. So the contractors abuse the system while the government has to pay for the abuse. In the end, it is you the taxpayer who pays for this because you blame the agency and not the congress who set the rules!

    Remember, if the government is dysfunctional, it is not because of the people doing the job. It is because they have to follow the confusing rules and regulations set by congress. Congress sets it up for the government to fail so they can pursue their own agenda. And they get away with it because they know most of the American people are too stupid to understand this. For once, they might be right on something!
    sbarman