North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: State Super-DMCA Too True
Well, if it is that big.. no IPSEC.. then I suspect Cisco, Checkpoint, and others to stand up ASAP.. This is no right.... As I see it a growing percentage of companies are moving to IPSEC VPNs and leaving dedicated ckts behind.. I can't believe that legislators would be so un-informed, and Cisco/the industry would be so out of touch.. J > -----Original Message----- > From: William Allen Simpson [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 9:39 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: State Super-DMCA Too True > > > > Jack Bates wrote: > > > > William Allen Simpson wrote: > > > It outlaws all encryption, and all remailers. > > > > I'm missing where it outlaws these? In fact, it outlaws > others (say your > > ISP) from decryping your encrypted data. > > > That is not correct. > > I'm very sensitive to these issues. As those of you that have been > around for awhile may recall, I was investigated by the FBI > for "treason" > merely for *WRITING* the specification for PPP CHAP and > discussing it at > the IETF (under Bush I). I don't expect it to be different > for Bush II. > > As Larry Blunk points out, to "possess" an encryption device > is a felony! > > Jack, you need to actually look at the text of the Act: > > (1) A person shall not assemble, develop, manufacture, possess, > deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise an unlawful > telecommunications access device or assemble, develop, > manufacture, > possess, deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise a > telecommunications device intending to use those devices > or to allow > the devices to be used to do any of the following or knowing or > having reason to know that the devices are intended to be > used to do > any of the following: > > (a) ... > > (b) Conceal the existence or place of origin or destination of any > telecommunications service. > > [no encryption, no steganography, no remailers, no NAT, no tunnels] > [no Kerberos, no SSH, no IPSec, no SMTPTLS] > > (c) To receive, disrupt, decrypt, transmit, retransmit, acquire, > intercept, or facilitate the receipt, disruption, decryption, > transmission, retransmission, acquisition, or interception of any > telecommunications service without the express authority or actual > consent of the telecommunications service provider. > > [no NAT, no wireless, no sniffers, no redirects, no war driving, ...] > > (2) A person shall not modify, alter, program, or reprogram a > telecommunications access device for the purposes described in > subsection (1). > > [no research, no mod'ing] > > (3) A person shall not deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise > plans, written instructions, or materials for ... > > [no technical papers detailed enough to matter] > > (4) A person who violates subsection (1), (2), or (3) is > guilty of a > felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 4 years or a > fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both. All fines shall > be imposed > for each unlawful telecommunications access device or > telecommunications access device involved in the offense. Each > unlawful telecommunications access device or telecommunications > access device is considered a separate violation. > > [big penalties] > > > (a) "Telecommunications" and "telecommunications service" mean any > service lawfully provided for a charge or compensation to > facilitate > the origination, transmission, retransmission, emission, or > reception of signs, data, images, signals, writings, sounds, or > other intelligence or equivalence of intelligence of any > nature over > any telecommunications system by any method, including, but not > limited to, electronic, electromagnetic, magnetic, optical, > photo-optical, digital, or analog technologies. > > [everything from a DVD, to the network, to the monitor, to t-shirts] > > -- > William Allen Simpson > Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B > 6A 15 2C 32 >
|