Subject: RE: Email Privacy eating software

From: "Parkinson, Jonathan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 12:33:19 +0100

In the UK we have the same type of problem, this time from my Favorite
Company MI5.

'The UK is leading the world when it comes to high-tech spying on its
citizens'
Please see
http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_762000/762514.stm

Lets face it, internet service providers will be forced to install black
boxes in their 
data centres that connect directly to an MI5 monitoring centre in London.
Now that would 
be nice to hack into.  

More to the point, Who is going to fund this? 'thinking' Oh yes thats why
Petrol in the 
UK has now passed the £1.03 per litre barrier.
'http://www.rip-off.co.uk/fuel.htm' 

:-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Crowcroft [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 12:03 PM
To: Anthony Atkielski
Cc: ietf
Subject: Re: Email Privacy eating software

In message <01dc01bfed78$0e7a55a0$0a00000a@contactdish>, Anthony Atkielski
type
d:

 >>I don't understand why the FBI feels that it needs to have a top-secret
 >>black box attached to the ISP's network.  Why not just have the ISP
provide
 >>a copy of all e-mail to or from the specified mailbox?

wiretap is a weapon in the FBI's armoury

in the US, YOU have the right to bear arms

You should demand the constitutional right to wiretap the FBI and CIA and so

on right now.

that will fix things.

j.

---

From: Jon Crowcroft <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 13:00:25 +0100

In message <[email-masked]>, 

 >>In the UK we have the same type of problem, this time from my Favorite

I agree.
i also think that there are important lessons for lawmakers in other countries,
so it is a suitable subject for IETF discussion.

 >>http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_762000/762514.stm=

yes, this is something that the UK should be ashamed of  - there is
very good documentary evidence that the government is ignoring
technical advice on the costs ot the ISP community in terms of
implementing this they wayu that the UK law was designed, or the risks
to citizens, and the loss of revenue when content and application
providers move their business to palecs which implement less stupid,
expensive and ineffective ways to intercept criminal or terrorist 
communication - the home offices response to criticism was a
masterpiece of political rubbish, and included specific items which
were lies.  examples include assertions about what other coutnries
were doing in terms of techniocal implementations of both intercept,
and who gets charged for the implementation cost.

 >>Lets face it, internet service providers will be forced to install =
 >>black
 >>boxes in their=20
 >>data centres that connect directly to an MI5 monitoring centre in =
 >>London.
 >>Now that would=20
 >>be nice to hack into. =20

when it happens, it will be a good day for demoracy.

one trick to do is to put a bunch of fake data on the net whch causes them
to either act on it, or have to randiomize whether they act or not
(see cryptonomicon) so that real miscreants wont be able to tell they
are listening (fairly standard stuff in fact) - turns out that there
are several ways to put in place random traffic generators (which even
more interestingly can also be part of billing systems) that run 
counter-intuitive, but make it very hard to do RIP but do allow one to
retain privacy.....

 >>More to the point, Who is going to fund this? 'thinking' Oh yes thats =
 >>why
 >>Petrol in the=20
 >>UK has now passed the =A31.03 per litre barrier.
 >>'http://www.rip-off.co.uk/fuel.htm'=20

right - but in that case, we can take public transport or buy a bike -
in the case of ecommerce, it can go elsewhere and the UK loses.

note that a lot of the GRID users are talking about striping data over
multiple paths (yes, and at 1.2Gbps per path) so the data copy costs
of intercept are more than double the data transfer  - in fact they
would be just with normal dynamic routing

the reason the UK bill is confused is that it was written by
telephants - people who probably lost their jobs as the tradditonal
phone business goes marginal and now advise shady organisations such
as gchq - these folks understand that the Exchange in the PSTN is the
natuaral point for billing and is therefore also quite a reasnable
palce to do intercept 

what they dont get is that there is no natural point to do this in a
packet net, least of all a datagram, end to end network, except at the
end points.....

what annoys me is that the UK government has persistnytly caimed that
ALL opponents  of the bill oppose intercept, when in fact almost all
the ones I've spoken to object to a STUPID pointless waste of money,
not to intercept at feasiable (E.g. end systems - such as email
servers, web, web cachce/proxy, napster server etc) points....

 >>In message <01dc01bfed78$0e7a55a0$0a00000a@contactdish>, Anthony =
 >>Atkielski
 >>type
 >>d:
 >>
 >> >>I don't understand why the FBI feels that it needs to have a =
 >>top-secret
 >>You should demand the constitutional right to wiretap the FBI and CIA =
 >>and so
 >>
 >>on right now.
 >>
 >>that will fix things.
 >>
 >>j.

 cheers

   jon

---

From: Doug Isenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 08:33:30 -0400

From today's Wall Street Journal 
(http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB963523417716552926.htm):

One of the nation's largest Internet-service providers, Earthlink Inc., has 
refused to install a new Federal Bureau of Investigation electronic 
surveillance device on its network, saying technical adjustments required 
to use the device caused disruptions for customers.

The FBI has used Carnivore, as the surveillance device is called, in a 
number of criminal investigations. But EarthLink is the first ISP to offer 
a public account of an actual experience with Carnivore. The FBI has 
claimed that Carnivore won't interfere with an ISP's operations....

=======================
Douglas M. Isenberg
Attorney @ Law
Editor & Publisher, GigaLaw.com
Legal columnist, Internet World magazine
=======================
GigaLaw.com: "Legal Information for
Internet and Technology Professionals"
http://www.GigaLaw.com
=======================