North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Fridays are always good for shock headlines...
Well, the thing that really got my attention was "...forcing equipment manaufacturers.." -- which is somewhat of a broad brush- stroke. Having said that, this has been discussed ad nauseum, has had the FCC rule on it, etc., and has -- at first blush-- seen U.S. courts support it. But the Internet is _not_ the U.S., and contrary to LEA and U.S. agency opinion, does not require everyone on the planet to comply. This presents a bunch of problems -- and submitting to arbitrary logic along the lines of (paraphrased) "Well, what's the problem?" doesn't even come close to illustrating that the problem is understood. That's the only point I was trying (and probably unsuccessfuly) to make. :-) And this: We work in a world where we're trying to keep bits flowing between various points in the Internet, and compliance to a basic set of accepted standards seems to be an environment which is becoming more and more clouded by "foo" -- where "foo" is your various garden variety scare tactic of the day. What a mess. - ferg -- Gadi Evron <[email protected]> wrote: [snip] > > The FBI has drafted sweeping legislation that would require Internet > service providers to create wiretapping hubs for police surveillance > and force makers of networking gear to build in backdoors for > eavesdropping, CNET News.com has learned. > [snip] Potential abuse means a lot of things, and it certainly dictates prudence and vigilence by citizens and the Gov. That said, I think this may really be a win-win for both the LEO's and the ISP's. Than again, if an ISP is approached once every 20 years, I hope the FBI will be covering the costs. Someone always says they do? Gadi. [snip] -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/