|
search / subscribe / upload / contact |
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| RSS-Feed Depeschen |  |
|
|
||
|
||
Date: 2000-01-30
ENFOPOL scharf, mit Curry-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- ENFOPOL scharf mit Curry Überall auf der Welt bietet sich dasselbe Bild. Was von gesetzlich ermächtigten Behörden in den ILETS [International Law Enforcement Telecom Seminars] an Überwachungsmassnahmen [in EU vordem ENFOPOL genannt] ausbaldowert wurde, findet in seinen Weg in nationale Legislativen. Die indische Regierung hat ihre Überwachungs/pläne ganz besonders scharf angerichtet. -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- relayed by Kai Raven via [email protected] http://home.kamp.net/home/kai.raven/index.html -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- The BJP government wants to introduce an Indian Information Technology Act. That, in itself, is not a bad thing. It is, in fact, a good idea, as IT today is administered by an increasingly ragged-looking patchwork of outdated and inadequate laws. However, they just couldn't resist the opportunity to try and make things easier for them to surveil the citizenry, preferably without said citizenry's knowledge. The draft bill which has been prepared by the Department of Electronics (DoE) has been sent to the Law Ministry for clearance. It will then be sent to the Cabinet for approval and ratification. Some of the alarming proposals in this bill are: Any Internet Service Provider will have to make arrangements to monitor all traffic passing through its servers, and make such traffic available to "properly constituted authorities" for "valid reasons of security". This would include agencies such as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). And they aren't sparing encrypted traffic, either. On demand, you will be expected to decode messages you have sent, in effect handing over your private key. The purported reason ? "National Security". As usual. The proposed bill also contains some confusing references to "distant signatures" which it says will help e-commerce, but I wish to focus on the damage which the tapping provision will cause. As the British net.activist Danny O'Brien said in response to similar legislation in the UK, these are the reasons why this is a very bad thing. It's bad for e-commerce. It will add billions to the cost of doing business online, and take months - even years - to implement. People won't trust a system which gives a government- appointed stranger a back-door key to their e-mail. Overseas consumers and businesses won't want to trade with us. They won't want to give away the keys to their data, either. It'll impact the IT industry by driving business overseas. There is near-zero enthusiasm for the government's proposals amongst big business. Anywhere. It won't catch a single criminal. Criminals won't use the government's system. It's trivially easy to bypass the proposed controls if you're planning on breaking the law. For example, all it takes is one entry in your email program to use a different server to send out your mail, thus redering the whole issue moot. Also, there exist techniques like steganography that hide encrypted data in such a way as to escape detection. Despite this, we've yet to hear of one example of an investigation which has been hampered by an inability to break encrypted codes. National security or otherwise. In fact, as Fred Baker, Chair of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) said in a recent announcement, ..strong cryptography is essential to the security of the Internet; restrictions on its use or availability will leave us with a weak, vulnerable network, endanger the privacy of users and businesses, and slow the growth of electronic commerce. There is still time. If government sees that there is uproar over this, they will push it underground for a while. It won't go away, but it will buy time. An example of the kind of uproar I'm talking about is the spontaneous anger that erupted on various mailing lists when this news got out. I have collected some of the most technically and logically sound arguments here. some URLs for more information: Die Bill http://www.mit.gov.in/it-bill.htm http://www.tbtf.com/archive/1998-12-15.html#s01 http://members.tripod.com/~india_gii/ http://www.stand.org.uk/ -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- - -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- edited by published on: 2000-01-30 comments to [email protected] subscribe Newsletter - -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
|
|
|
 |
related topiqs |
 |
CURRENTLY RUNNING |
q/Talk 1.Juli: The Danger of Software Users Don't Control
|
|
|
!WATCH OUT! |
bits4free 14.Juli 2011: OpenStreetMap Erfinder Steve Coast live in Wien
|
|