Subject: perens-perpass-appropriate-response-01

From: Bruce Perens <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 18:14:29 -0800

I have written a reply to draft-farrell-perpass-attack-00

Please read it at http://perens.com/works/ietf/perpass/appropriate-response/01.pdf

The reply is _not_ in the form of an Internet Draft, because it's
political discourse.

Thanks

Bruce Perens

---

From: Tim Bray <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 18:24:41 -0800

“The proposers and implementers of systems intended to hinder law
enforcement are arguably a criminal or treasonous conspiracy.”

Ooh... such glamor. I guess we can all wear black and adopt furtive
expressions!

Also, use a spell-checker.

On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Bruce Perens <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Please read it at
> http://perens.com/works/ietf/perpass/appropriate-response/01.pdf

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 14:26:21 +1100

Bruce,

The appropriate place to discuss perpass is the [email-masked] list.

Regards,

On 4 Dec 2013, at 1:14 pm, Bruce Perens <[email-masked]> wrote:

> The reply is _not_ in the form of an Internet Draft, because it's political discourse.
> 
>     Thanks
> 
>     Bruce Perens

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/

---

From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 23:30:31 -0500

> Ooh... such glamor. I guess we can all wear black and adopt furtive
The NSA is not a law enforcement agency, it is a part of the US military
and answers to the Secretary of Defense.

Any NSA involvement in law enforcement is arguably criminal under US law,
the Posse Comitatus act is certainly intended to prevent military forces
engaging in law enforcement activities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

Needless to say there is very good reason for such restrictions. Including
the very peculiar mindset of some of the people who run the organization
(and yes, I have met them).

One of the concerns I have is precisely the risk of acts of treason, but by
the people with access to this information. During the Bush administration
the head of the CIA was forced to resign after a series of well planned
leaks concerning the activities of his second in command, two corrupt
Congressman later convicted of accepting bribes and some government
contractors. Had the scandal come to trial we might well have learned
rather more.

I have always been of the opinion that the leaks came from the NSA and that
this was evidence of a widespread surveillance operation and that at least
some employees were abusing access for political gain.

It seems to me that the risk that the information collected would be abused
in the same manner that Hoover abused his office is very high. And I will
continue to consider claims to the contrary as ridiculous as long as
Hoover's name is on the FBI headquarters building.

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

---

From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 07:57:45 +0000

>      http://perens.com/works/ietf/perpass/appropriate-response/01.pdf

+1

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[email-masked]         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

---

From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 08:12:18 +0000

In message <[email-masked]>
, Phillip Hallam-Baker writes:

>During the Bush administration
>the head of the CIA was forced to resign [...]

During the Obama administration, the head of CIA was forced to resign
because he couldn't keep his communication with his love-interest
secret due to The Global War on Privacy.