|
Home > Archive > Anonymous Servers > February 2007 > ISPs forced to keep logs indefinitely?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
ISPs forced to keep logs indefinitely?
|
|
| Anonyma 2007-02-08, 1:12 pm |
| If this becomes law, it won't be long before some bureaucrat declares that
remailers and TOR nodes are really isps, and are covered by the law.
Attorney General Gonzales would be permitted to force Internet providers
to keep logs of Web browsing, instant message exchanges, and e-mail
conversations indefinitely.
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/02/07/1930228.shtml
| |
|
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 08:13:12 -0500 (EST), Anonyma wrote in
Message-Id: <3b57ac3818e3a5639ec73511571c53d7@deuxpi.ca>:
> Attorney General Gonzales would be permitted to force Internet providers
> to keep logs of Web browsing, instant message exchanges, and e-mail
> conversations indefinitely.
I see a good side to this. Currently ISP's *might* be retaining logs.
If a law comes in to say they *must* retain them, then there is no
longer scope for doubt in anyones mind. Your communications will be
logged and anything sent in plain text can be read.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBRcsrNGoLu9HNUqmMAQpwtwf+OR6fnC4s
NzraBU7IayeZyBAi/6Q7wnlp
ZCcMoBlxKR8hpVBTlgt8TWt9VWEoNH9mDmEwqc7j
iqUzm31MqkZqASoS3FDcb0Mp
1AbBmj9/ pKDLs0F9QLYm+PF8IGOzuGMmUbv39vf1vxN34KHj
DltO/mGTXIZScLP3
ofnOngVW9q2tPlHEp1FHpOZt3jTfebTK+M974wJx
5DuE9dHqzYkYT5zpFxxI90lj
N52PqgzKamybs1Y1Ue76gF/ EN15vev+Xb25JhnIiar4zyufPDDFLUU2dSL3Jp7h
W
lsB1yvQ2klaiJrCwUAefXj//9N6wqxnO3AZNydtY72M+/Jnz0flD8w==
=8j3x
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>
| |
| Nomen Nescio 2007-02-08, 1:12 pm |
| On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:52:52 +0000, Zax wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 08:13:12 -0500 (EST), Anonyma wrote in
> Message-Id: <3b57ac3818e3a5639ec73511571c53d7@deuxpi.ca>:
>
>
> I see a good side to this. Currently ISP's *might* be retaining logs.
> If a law comes in to say they *must* retain them, then there is no
> longer scope for doubt in anyones mind. Your communications will be
> logged and anything sent in plain text can be read.
That would be good if it got everyone to use encryption, which they might
do if it also got the writers of email/news clients to build it into their
products. Don't know if that would happen though. Most people don't seem
to care about their privacy. They even think that the government has a
right to spy on them but that they have no right to keep anything
private. They say strange things like: If you have nothing to hide, why
should you care?
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEVAwUBRcsrNGoLu9HNUqmMAQpwtwf+OR6fnC4s
NzraBU7IayeZyBAi/6Q7wnlp
> ZCcMoBlxKR8hpVBTlgt8TWt9VWEoNH9mDmEwqc7j
iqUzm31MqkZqASoS3FDcb0Mp
> 1AbBmj9/ pKDLs0F9QLYm+PF8IGOzuGMmUbv39vf1vxN34KHj
DltO/mGTXIZScLP3
> ofnOngVW9q2tPlHEp1FHpOZt3jTfebTK+M974wJx
5DuE9dHqzYkYT5zpFxxI90lj
> N52PqgzKamybs1Y1Ue76gF/ EN15vev+Xb25JhnIiar4zyufPDDFLUU2dSL3Jp7h
W
> lsB1yvQ2klaiJrCwUAefXj//9N6wqxnO3AZNydtY72M+/Jnz0flD8w== =8j3x -----END
> PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
|
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 16:20:19 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio wrote in
Message-Id: <0e3b43680dbb00a346489ba5fc79ee68@dizum.com>:
> That would be good if it got everyone to use encryption, which they might
> do if it also got the writers of email/news clients to build it into their
> products. Don't know if that would happen though. Most people don't seem
> to care about their privacy. They even think that the government has a
> right to spy on them but that they have no right to keep anything
> private. They say strange things like: If you have nothing to hide, why
> should you care?
This public passivity seems to be unique to electronic means of
communication. If a government announced it was going to start opening
envelopes and reading letters, there would be a national outcry.
The solution IMO is for mail and chat clients to start delivering encryption
by default. That should include PGP functionality and TLS encryption at
the transport layer. Another major boost would be a Windows based MTA
that had functional TLS. This would effectively take the ISP out of the
mail loop. Something that would no doubt delight them.
The stopper in the bottle is probably Microsoft. No matter how good
alternate solutions might be, the average user will stick with good ol'
Outlook Express and Internet Explorer. This no doubt suits Big Brother
very nicely.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBRctIWGoLu9HNUqmMAQranQf9FMTOKV2y
g59CvKD7U6tL/5w5yAd7VROP
cdfJ9Aj9dLOie1tKv5tXN76S00/UegXS10TCUiVQpG5msT0EO7HdnU5V8Z9lBZGE
56qGugQ2bLQtmYKda/ PPP+fk0y6XUFEmMqvJCL92sD0tyDBHDDetOZ+igG
FeBnep
XStKB+3eE9Njtaa1IKFxsHlRWolsvGJ7GXMqIGmp
6DEKmCM/6KxNs0o3QOSeuaFn
hDuCTVhufXf+nKTSdv9UjDaxWAttcZvUZKtlcJe/9PJeowE64WkDmVsfQMP1ugwi
tUH6uRuPnEld/4sLPZ535gKsimy0x0Mo0jcAdYzXkLcSnaLLCJ/i9Q==
=lIQV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>
| |
| Gogarty 2007-02-08, 1:12 pm |
| In article <eqfh8o$uu2$1@bananasplit.info>, admin@bananasplit.info says...
>
>
>This public passivity seems to be unique to electronic means of
>communication. If a government announced it was going to start opening
>envelopes and reading letters, there would be a national outcry.
>
You are behind the times. Mr. Bush has already decreed that the gummint can
open first class mail without a warrant.
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-02-08, 1:12 pm |
| On Thu, 08 Feb 2007, Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
>In article <eqfh8o$uu2$1@bananasplit.info>, admin@bananasplit.info says...
>
>You are behind the times. Mr. Bush has already decreed that the gummint can
>open first class mail without a warrant.
That is a gross oversimplification. Bush does not rule by decree, no matter
how much the Democrats want to make it out as such.
| |
| George Orwell 2007-02-08, 7:12 pm |
| Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> said:
>On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:52:52 +0000, Zax wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 08:13:12 -0500 (EST), Anonyma wrote in
> Message-Id: <3b57ac3818e3a5639ec73511571c53d7@deuxpi.ca>:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I see a good side to this. Currently ISP's *might* be retaining logs.
> If a law comes in to say they *must* retain them, then there is no
> longer scope for doubt in anyones mind. Your communications will be
> logged and anything sent in plain text can be read.
> That would be good if it got everyone to use encryption, which they
> might do if it also got the writers of email/news clients to build it
> into their products. Don't know if that would happen though. Most
> people don't seem to care about their privacy. They even think that
> the government has a right to spy on them but that they have no right
> to keep anything private. They say strange things like: If you have
> nothing to hide, why should you care?
Maybe if someone wrote a truly evil privacy-raping worm that posted
the credit card numbers, private email, hard drive contents, etc.
of the victims, they might figure it the hell out. Morons like this
may not deserve privacy, but it is a real nightmare to lose my
own privacy mainly because of the apathy of XXXXing idiots.
And of course at the moment, it is still possible to encrypt
without going to jail. Guess how long that'll last. Not long
if the cretins have their way.
| |
|
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote in
news:85994e4d1632355e4fbe0c05caeb1522@mi
xmaster.it:
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> said:
>
>
>
>
>
> Maybe if someone wrote a truly evil privacy-raping worm that posted
> the credit card numbers, private email, hard drive contents, etc.
> of the victims, they might figure it the hell out. Morons like this
> may not deserve privacy, but it is a real nightmare to lose my
> own privacy mainly because of the apathy of XXXXing idiots.
> And of course at the moment, it is still possible to encrypt
> without going to jail. Guess how long that'll last. Not long
> if the cretins have their way.
I seriously doubt that would accomplish anything more than getting even
more watching and snooping of net activites in an effort to catch whoever
created such a beast.
My opinion only, YMMV
- --
http://blog.peculiarplace.com
http://comments.lurasbookcase.com Comments from the peanut gallery
http://iamnotahamster.peculiarplace.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.52
iQEVAwUBRcvti3V+YnyE1GYEAQiJyAgAmpx201q5
1G/BO87G3cjOg3nEnyzOdM63
W5FoOfZXzKUSm0zRMec+BDqGFL78iXwQYMHV7kna
48Jy6Qn2M215pKpV6/unSB8+
OBH7rA0c+VAphMpRm5hPQxUX3jtj03gCYLCDDkYQ
hzx8mMlDTeCAM6UY4vJkWfTk
9PgyeN+r8mwJMjVS40kklvj3v4KpQ5SS1N83rBht
v/pRdap7C+JVk12TAbaNKDkY
3kfXlduwTanNv5RUIOFWPIwp5eEi2NfvsKUjGg1/aXWxSFwc8MC4nFyouZoxK+Z1
14dFrHZ/ RJ0wLgCUtXOnavRWZgjIWraRKaGnSQw+ADKFIBO2
T94crw==
=N/ft
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
|
|
|