Silk Road forums
Discussion => Shipping => Topic started by: MarcelKetman on July 03, 2013, 03:33 pm
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us/monitoring-of-snail-mail.html?hp&_r=0
All the more reason the keep mixing things up buyers and vendors. Shocked that everything isn't x-rayed since they go to the effort of photographing ever single one.
-
That is a very interesting and frightening article.
-
Especially interesting is the multimedia section, which includes a scan of the so-called "Mail Watch" and the USPS procedure manual for "Mail Cover Requests": http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/06/30/us/30postal-mail-cover-documents.html?ref=us
This is all obviously very troubling for SR buyers and sellers, as it's not hard to imagine one of the many law enforcement agencies easily mining this data and building up a data profile for seller and buyer, just based on package look, source, and destination. I don't think many sellers switch up their packaging drastically for every order.
What techniques should be employed to thwart this strategy? I'm not sure how to avoid this except a snail mail mixnet, like Tor but IRL.
Anyone have any brilliant ideas? Are there any USPS employees here willing to share additional info?
-
Na...
I don't imagine SR being a primary target for that. far too much mail and far too hard to data mine. and even if... vendors and buyers will just need to do more work .... but what can ya do... life is hard.
-
The dude in the article was the spokesperson for an ECO-TERRORIST group, I think you're fine if you don't associate with terrorists....
-
terrorism is the excuse for everything... don't believe a word
-
I've said it before and I'll say it again, where's the incentive to bust SR vendors and buyers from the USPS stand point? The DEA is an entirely different entity than the USPS. Sure they may collaborate when a USPS worker discovers a stinky package or something obvious, but other than that the USPS is surely willing to look the other way for a few pills or a sack of weed. It's just hurting their bottom line if they try to muscle us out of sending packages. Last time I made a similar comment someone posted that we are a very small percentage of the USPS bottom line. I can't argue against that, but what I will say is if you were a business owner and your business was in the shitter, would you really be going out of your way to remove and prevent packages from being sent? The USPS has made public statements saying we don't want postal workers putting themselves at risk by carrying around drugs on the streets and delivering them. That makes sense, but when's the last time you heard about a postal worker getting jumped and robbed for his package of drugs he was delivering? I think the USPS just made a public relations statement and it stops there.
Anyone watch that show American Greed? I watched an episode one time where a guy was running a ponzi scheme and kept writing bad checks to people. The bank he was using allowed him to run the ponzi scheme though. Later the victims of the fraud stated that the bank must have known. Why didn't the bank turn him in? Because every time his checks bounced he paid the bank their fees. They said that this guy paid over $100,000 in bad check fees over the year or two he was doing this fraud.
My point is money talks. In the US of A it's all about where the money's at. And the fact is we're providing money to the USPS and they don't have the money and resources to tackle the issue. We've got terrorism to fight. That's top priority. That's why the dogs sniff for bombs not drugs at the USPS. If they sniffed for drugs the dogs would be barking non stop and an entire postal inspectors day would be spent busting people for drugs and a bomb might slip through the cracks and that's the worst possible thing.
-
Did anyone else get a laugh at the "handwritten card"? As if the Postal Service doesn't allow email or something. ;D
But yes, disturbing - and all the more so in light of the recent Synergy Operation, with its:
"Millions and millions" of dollars are flowing to terror groups in the Middle East from the sale of synthetic drugs like " K-2" and "Spice" in the United States, according to Drug Enforcement Administration officials.
from (clearnet) here:
http://news.yahoo.com/bath-salts-other-synthetic-drugs-making-millions-terrorists-173802326.html
Careful, kiddos. Your habit is FUNDING TERROR. Mail covers for all!
My point is money talks. In the US of A it's all about where the money's at. And the fact is we're providing money to the USPS and they don't have the money and resources to tackle the issue. We've got terrorism to fight. That's top priority. That's why the dogs sniff for bombs not drugs at the USPS. If they sniffed for drugs the dogs would be barking non stop and an entire postal inspectors day would be spent busting people for drugs and a bomb might slip through the cracks and that's the worst possible thing.
Maybe it's just the USPS's way of getting back for that fact that they don't get any money from taxes. "What's that, Uncle Sam? No tax money? Fine. Guess it's drug money then. And you're definitely not opening anything w/out a warrant." ;)
They do bring drug sniffing dogs to sorting centers, but typically only when a package or shipment already looks suspicious (or, it seems, being received by someone who's mail is flagged). A dog alerting to a package is used as cause to obtain warrants.
-
its another way the postal service is trying to track down silkroad sellers/buyers.
-
Everyone keeps acting surprised about this. This is the fourth time I've seen this brought up. Yes they photograph all mail. That is even how the machines read the address. Surely you guys didn't think mail was hand sorted at every facility... ???
-
yea theyve been doing it for years, this story (see link below) happened 5 or 6 years back, and they claim its been goin on for decades before that..
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/04/post-carrier-ac/
-
yes they photogragh all the mail, but they arent allowed to open all the mail, And that is why vendors try to make it look as generic as possible and business mail like.
However i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
-
yes they photogragh all the mail, but they arent allowed to open all the mail, And that is why vendors try to make it look as generic as possible and business mail like.
However i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
Not really when you consider there's probably around 30 sets of prints on ever letter/package.
-
yes they photogragh all the mail, but they arent allowed to open all the mail, And that is why vendors try to make it look as generic as possible and business mail like.
However i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
Not really when you consider there's probably around 30 sets of prints on ever letter/package.
But thats what im saying precisely, Say they were looking at 10 letters that look all the same but one has drugs inside. and they look for fingerprints, the package with like one set from a postman will get flagged as compared to the other which have the senders, postman and sorters, But if they positioned the section where they were scanning for prints right as the mail comes in out the sacks, then you are literaly talking the ones with no prints or one set get flagged.
-
yes they photogragh all the mail, but they arent allowed to open all the mail, And that is why vendors try to make it look as generic as possible and business mail like.
However i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
Not really when you consider there's probably around 30 sets of prints on ever letter/package.
But thats what im saying precisely, Say they were looking at 10 letters that look all the same but one has drugs inside. and they look for fingerprints, the package with like one set from a postman will get flagged as compared to the other which have the senders, postman and sorters, But if they positioned the section where they were scanning for prints right as the mail comes in out the sacks, then you are literaly talking the ones with no prints or one set get flagged.
What he is trying to say is that even SR packages have prints all over them because so many postal workers handle them.
I would also like to add that finding fingerprints is not as easy as running the package through some machine really fast. It takes time. They use that black dust shit that gets stuck to everything. and is a bitch to clean off. I've seen my fair share of crime scenes and it's pretty hard to get prints off many surfaces. They have to be really smooth/slick like glass or very smooth plastic. Another way is a process called fuming in which they stick an item they want to lift fingerprints from in a machine that vaporizes super glue so the super glue sticks to the oil from your fingerprints in which now can lift them from.
-
yes they photogragh all the mail, but they arent allowed to open all the mail, And that is why vendors try to make it look as generic as possible and business mail like.
However i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
Not really when you consider there's probably around 30 sets of prints on ever letter/package.
But thats what im saying precisely, Say they were looking at 10 letters that look all the same but one has drugs inside. and they look for fingerprints, the package with like one set from a postman will get flagged as compared to the other which have the senders, postman and sorters, But if they positioned the section where they were scanning for prints right as the mail comes in out the sacks, then you are literaly talking the ones with no prints or one set get flagged.
What he is trying to say is that even SR packages have prints all over them because so many postal workers handle them.
I would also like to add that finding fingerprints is not as easy as running the package through some machine really fast. It takes time. They use that black dust shit that gets stuck to everything. and is a bitch to clean off. I've seen my fair share of crime scenes and it's pretty hard to get prints off many surfaces. They have to be really smooth/slick like glass or very smooth plastic. Another way is a process called fuming in which they stick an item they want to lift fingerprints from in a machine that vaporizes super glue so the super glue sticks to the oil from your fingerprints in which now can lift them from.
Thank you, Jack! people act as if LE can just "summon" prints in an instant. Most people don't realize how uncommon it is to lift a quality print randomly. I would say worrying about them "looking" for the presence, or lack of prints on a package, is a reach, if not outright ridiculous.
-
yes they photogragh all the mail, but they arent allowed to open all the mail, And that is why vendors try to make it look as generic as possible and business mail like.
However i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
Mhh... not sure that is 100% practical for various reasons. Eg: what you say is true I guess for C2C mail, but for B2C mail it's not. Nobody is touching those. Maybe one of the postal guys here can comment.
If true, some1 can start selling fingerprint "stamps". a stamp that leaves fingerprint like prints on envelops. + some swat-like substance.
@jack
there might be new ways to scan for prints... comments from postal guy?
-
yes they photogragh all the mail, but they arent allowed to open all the mail, And that is why vendors try to make it look as generic as possible and business mail like.
However i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
Not really when you consider there's probably around 30 sets of prints on ever letter/package.
But thats what im saying precisely, Say they were looking at 10 letters that look all the same but one has drugs inside. and they look for fingerprints, the package with like one set from a postman will get flagged as compared to the other which have the senders, postman and sorters, But if they positioned the section where they were scanning for prints right as the mail comes in out the sacks, then you are literaly talking the ones with no prints or one set get flagged.
What he is trying to say is that even SR packages have prints all over them because so many postal workers handle them.
I would also like to add that finding fingerprints is not as easy as running the package through some machine really fast. It takes time. They use that black dust shit that gets stuck to everything. and is a bitch to clean off. I've seen my fair share of crime scenes and it's pretty hard to get prints off many surfaces. They have to be really smooth/slick like glass or very smooth plastic. Another way is a process called fuming in which they stick an item they want to lift fingerprints from in a machine that vaporizes super glue so the super glue sticks to the oil from your fingerprints in which now can lift them from.
Thank you, Jack! people act as if LE can just "summon" prints in an instant. Most people don't realize how uncommon it is to lift a quality print randomly. I would say worrying about them "looking" for the presence, or lack of prints on a package, is a reach, if not outright ridiculous.
Im sure they have a machine that shows up prints, Like the way a heat signature machine would with a hot item. Im actually pretty sure i have read about this machine somewhere il have a look about and see if i can find any links for you all.
And Sinnfein1488, As if your username does not give away where your from, And only half the people from ireland are catholic, Maybe a percentage of them are known supporters of sinnfein, and an even smaller percentage use TOR. Your narrowing yourself pretty fast for LE buddy.
And if you are reffering to me included in your post about people think LE can just summon prints, Then i assure you, you would probably be surprised at how often they can lift a viable print, Dont think they cant match partials either, That is a thing of the past, they can match a partial with 50% of a print.
It is true that Shows like CSI and the rest of all the other forensic bullshit ones are pure propaganda that makes out as if murder is hard to get away with,It isnt easy, but it is nowhere near as hard as they make it look.
I was merely stating an idea that was on my train of thought because i thought it may of been of some relevance, It is not a reach or outright ridiculous at all. What is a joke is thinking your SR world is going to last forever if people do not take proactive steps towards keeping it alive.
And jack, Im sure flashlight may be onto something about the handling.
-
Nobody has a machine to scan fingerprints off of a surface like paper or cardboard. You can scan fingerprints right from your finger but not off a surface like paper or cardboard. I'm just putting that fact out there.
Also, if there was such a device, it would have to get right up on the package and touch it when scanning it. It wouldn't be able to scan hundreds of packages for fingerprints as they move through it at light speed. Technology like this has not been invented. :P
-
Nobody has a machine to scan fingerprints off of a surface like paper or cardboard. You can scan fingerprints right from your finger but not off a surface like paper or cardboard. I'm just putting that fact out there.
Also, if there was such a device, it would have to get right up on the package and touch it when scanning it. It wouldn't be able to scan hundreds of packages for fingerprints as they move through it at light speed. Technology like this has not been invented. :P
Nono, I think it is a machine jack, That shows the prints via something/some sort of residue they leave when they touch it (the scientific term escapes me) They dont actually scan the prints, Its more of a machine that can show the prints because of what its designed to do. (which wasnt originally show prints)
They could then remove the packages for manual scanning or whatever they would do. Or if they cant scan paper or cardboard they might remove the print via old fashioned methods and keep it untill the package is opened up to make sure it has no illicit substances inside.
-
Nobody has a machine to scan fingerprints off of a surface like paper or cardboard. You can scan fingerprints right from your finger but not off a surface like paper or cardboard. I'm just putting that fact out there.
Also, if there was such a device, it would have to get right up on the package and touch it when scanning it. It wouldn't be able to scan hundreds of packages for fingerprints as they move through it at light speed. Technology like this has not been invented. :P
Nono, I think it is a machine jack, That shows the prints via something/some sort of residue they leave when they touch it (the scientific term escapes me) They dont actually scan the prints, Its more of a machine that can show the prints because of what its designed to do. (which wasnt originally show prints)
They could then remove the packages for manual scanning or whatever they would do. Or if they cant scan paper or cardboard they might remove the print via old fashioned methods and keep it untill the package is opened up to make sure it has no illicit substances inside.
Oils and/or organic matter maybe? ???
I would be interested in any links that you come up with.
-
However i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
Interesting idea. But I imagine that most commercial mail(think electric bills, bank statments) are printed, stuffed and sealed by machines and the moved to the post office in big bags. I bet plenty of commercial mail is never touched by a finger.
-
Nobody has a machine to scan fingerprints off of a surface like paper or cardboard. You can scan fingerprints right from your finger but not off a surface like paper or cardboard. I'm just putting that fact out there.
Also, if there was such a device, it would have to get right up on the package and touch it when scanning it. It wouldn't be able to scan hundreds of packages for fingerprints as they move through it at light speed. Technology like this has not been invented. :P
Nono, I think it is a machine jack, That shows the prints via something/some sort of residue they leave when they touch it (the scientific term escapes me) They dont actually scan the prints, Its more of a machine that can show the prints because of what its designed to do. (which wasnt originally show prints)
They could then remove the packages for manual scanning or whatever they would do. Or if they cant scan paper or cardboard they might remove the print via old fashioned methods and keep it untill the package is opened up to make sure it has no illicit substances inside.
Oils and/or organic matter maybe? ???
I would be interested in any links that you come up with.
It may well have been mate, it was a few weeks ago i read up on it, Il have a browse and post whatever i come up with mate. I wish i could just remember the name of the damn machine now...
Cheers jackHowever i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
Interesting idea. But I imagine that most commercial mail(think electric bills, bank statments) are printed, stuffed and sealed by machines and the moved to the post office in big bags. I bet plenty of commercial mail is never touched by a finger.
Cheers tess, It just came into my head and i wondered about it seeing as i had read about the machine a few weeks back. I reckon that as well there are quite a few vendors that dont need to send massive packages and ship ounces and under in commercial sized mail bags, and i was thinking the exact same thing.
-
terrorism is the excuse for everything... don't believe a word
^^^^^^This.
The government will slap the word terrorism on anything and everything to achieve its agenda. There's always something more going on than what it stated by them.
-
As I mentioned in the OP, the big question for me is, how far away is the day that every piece of mail gets x-rayed?
-
yes they photogragh all the mail, but they arent allowed to open all the mail, And that is why vendors try to make it look as generic as possible and business mail like.
However i was thinking about this yesterday and i found a fatal flaw in it all, If they had some sort of machine that can scan mail for fingerprints quickly we would all be fucked, Now everybody knows vendors wear gloves minimum, use rubbing alcohol probably and do not leave fingerprints on the package, So all they would need to do is look for packages with no prints, How many normal people send a package and dont get their prints on it? Zero. Its like looking at things from a different angle, instead of trying to profile certain packages which they are not very good at judging by the success of many vendors on here, They start looking for ones that have NO prints, as its most probably a drug package etc. Scary?
Not really when you consider there's probably around 30 sets of prints on ever letter/package.
But thats what im saying precisely, Say they were looking at 10 letters that look all the same but one has drugs inside. and they look for fingerprints, the package with like one set from a postman will get flagged as compared to the other which have the senders, postman and sorters, But if they positioned the section where they were scanning for prints right as the mail comes in out the sacks, then you are literaly talking the ones with no prints or one set get flagged.
There are going to be tons of prints on the envelopes from postal workers, to people at the company that made the packaging, to the stockers at the store where the packaging that was sold to other customers who may have touched it.
-
I've said it before and I'll say it again, where's the incentive to bust SR vendors and buyers from the USPS stand point? The DEA is an entirely different entity than the USPS. Sure they may collaborate when a USPS worker discovers a stinky package or something obvious, but other than that the USPS is surely willing to look the other way for a few pills or a sack of weed. It's just hurting their bottom line if they try to muscle us out of sending packages. Last time I made a similar comment someone posted that we are a very small percentage of the USPS bottom line. I can't argue against that, but what I will say is if you were a business owner and your business was in the shitter, would you really be going out of your way to remove and prevent packages from being sent? The USPS has made public statements saying we don't want postal workers putting themselves at risk by carrying around drugs on the streets and delivering them. That makes sense, but when's the last time you heard about a postal worker getting jumped and robbed for his package of drugs he was delivering? I think the USPS just made a public relations statement and it stops there.
Anyone watch that show American Greed? I watched an episode one time where a guy was running a ponzi scheme and kept writing bad checks to people. The bank he was using allowed him to run the ponzi scheme though. Later the victims of the fraud stated that the bank must have known. Why didn't the bank turn him in? Because every time his checks bounced he paid the bank their fees. They said that this guy paid over $100,000 in bad check fees over the year or two he was doing this fraud.
My point is money talks. In the US of A it's all about where the money's at. And the fact is we're providing money to the USPS and they don't have the money and resources to tackle the issue. We've got terrorism to fight. That's top priority. That's why the dogs sniff for bombs not drugs at the USPS. If they sniffed for drugs the dogs would be barking non stop and an entire postal inspectors day would be spent busting people for drugs and a bomb might slip through the cracks and that's the worst possible thing.
Have you never heard of the USPI or ICE? The USPI is the agency that has the job of detecting illegal packages sent through the USPS. It is their entire damn job.