
doi: 10.1109/2.920616
In February 2001, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) renamed its controversial Internet surveillance tool, Carnivore, as the innocuous-sounding "DCS1000". Although the move is sensible from a public relations perspective, more than the system's name must change to protect innocent Internet users' rights. According to the FBI, Carnivore (as everyone outside the Bureau still calls it) allows law enforcement agents to intercept and collect e-mail and other electronic communications only when authorized by a court order. What is so controversial about Carnivore, and why has it provoked strong negative reactions from privacy advocates, editorial boards and members of the US Congress? The answers lie in how the system works and who controls it.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
