Re: DOJ Bullying? in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r16246948 en Sat, 30 Aug 2008 06:09:58 EDT Sat, 30 Aug 2008 06:09:58 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16249374 nixen :
said by sporkme See Profile :

said by nixen See Profile :

said by N10Cities See Profile :

Hmmmm.....I'll bet companies like EMC and others that specialize in NAS storage solutions WOULD LOVE to see this come to pass....because their business would grow by leaps and bounds! Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPPA, etc already are a big boost...nothing really wrong with that...just an observation...
Actaully, no, disk makers won't really benefit. That's not the type of data you keep on disk. Companies, like StorageTeK and ADIC, that make large tape libraries and companies, like Iron Mountain, that store tapes would benefit most.
What about all those folks pushing SATA as "near-line" storage? Who would you say is actually making inroads with that? I mean with a 3Ware controller and 500GB SATA drives you can easily get 5TB in a 3U case...
But why would you want to?

With tape, you do your daily vault, spit out the tape when it's and put it on a shelf until the retention policy has expired. Depending on your storage policies, a robot potentially never becomes full. You just keep rotating full tapes out and floating new ones in.

With a disk-based solution, you keep those disks spinning pretty much until they die. All those constantly spinning disks require a constant power pull. This also necessitates heat dissipation. Worse: what do you do when you've filled up those disks? You've got to replace them - either by incrementally replacing them or fully replacing the storage array.

Disk is great for transactional storage and even nearline storage. However, for "compliance" stuff, tape is the way to go.

-tom
--
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -Louis D Brandeis]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16249374 Tue, 06 Jun 2006 14:52:42 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16249124 sporkme :
said by nixen See Profile :

said by N10Cities See Profile :

Hmmmm.....I'll bet companies like EMC and others that specialize in NAS storage solutions WOULD LOVE to see this come to pass....because their business would grow by leaps and bounds! Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPPA, etc already are a big boost...nothing really wrong with that...just an observation...
Actaully, no, disk makers won't really benefit. That's not the type of data you keep on disk. Companies, like StorageTeK and ADIC, that make large tape libraries and companies, like Iron Mountain, that store tapes would benefit most.
What about all those folks pushing SATA as "near-line" storage? Who would you say is actually making inroads with that? I mean with a 3Ware controller and 500GB SATA drives you can easily get 5TB in a 3U case...
--
Day dreaming days in a daydream nation]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16249124 Tue, 06 Jun 2006 14:20:15 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16247824 AB :
said by Jason Levine See Profile :

I hope you didn't think I was supporting this measure. I was merely pointing out that the specter of Child Pornography was only raised to force ISPs (and politicians) into compliance with what the DOJ wanted. Child Pornography is disgusting and should be stopped, but a program like the one the DOJ is suggesting would be 1) prohibitively expensive, 2) highly intrusive to the privacy of the innocent, and 3) extremely likely to be abused (either by expanding the scope of the program beyond Child Pornography to "score a victory" for the program or by using the accumulated data to find some dirt on someone.)
Amen, brother! Well said!
--
Why, yes! Certifiably so. Why do you ask?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16247824 Tue, 06 Jun 2006 11:08:32 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16247213 Jason Levine : I hope you didn't think I was supporting this measure. I was merely pointing out that the specter of Child Pornography was only raised to force ISPs (and politicians) into compliance with what the DOJ wanted. Child Pornography is disgusting and should be stopped, but a program like the one the DOJ is suggesting would be 1) prohibitively expensive, 2) highly intrusive to the privacy of the innocent, and 3) extremely likely to be abused (either by expanding the scope of the program beyond Child Pornography to "score a victory" for the program or by using the accumulated data to find some dirt on someone.)
--
-Jason Levine
My Gallery | Jason's Toolbox | PCQandA.com | URateit.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16247213 Tue, 06 Jun 2006 09:04:18 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16246948 GhostDoggy : Makes no difference. In a public forum I would easily challenge the ability to have such a scheme implemented and then easily compromise it. A handful of $20 USB thumb-style NICs makes it rather easy to change MACs that could be used with someone else's wireless network.

And if that were not enough, you could just continue to use one MAC/NIC and wardrive to do whatever malicious activity you wanted in the first place. Child pornography is a weak excuse because a lot of people do not have children.

Its a joke to sugest that CP is above all other things in concern by the Bush administration. And then they are trying to get ISP's to foot what will be a very large bill that most will not be able to afford.

And this isn't to stop Internet crimes like DDOS, pirating media, or even terrorism. DOJ doesn't even see that on their substantial-threat radar, but the other arm of the government thinks all terrorists use ONLY phones to communicate with.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16246948 Tue, 06 Jun 2006 08:04:38 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16246530 kangabil : I haven't seen the obvious answer to the probablem if THEY really wanted it to happen.

Use an off-shore ISP with multiple gateways and random server links.

Hell, I'd make millions just looking after all of you who didn't want the guvvermint proctologists looking up what they shouldn't. :D
--
Who was that masked man?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16246530 Tue, 06 Jun 2006 04:24:24 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16242653 Geminimind : that sounds about right to me.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16242653 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 17:09:09 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16242408 MADcyborge : in the name of terrorism (durka-durka-jihad) we are dealt yet more harm from terrorists, we ar having our privacy stripped away. In the name of combating kiddy porn or terrorists (both are scum) we as a whole have to think will I get raided if I search for ---? I want to be able to type in on google how to setup a moonshine still, or search for an internet pharmacy selling cheap viagra or how to make a potato gun with out a team of FBI swat commandos holding a gun to my temple. This is America, we need to protet it but we need COMMON SENSE here. Whos with me? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16242408 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 16:37:46 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16242044 AB :
said by jimbo2150 See Profile :

Isn't it illegal to even possess any of this material???
Well you know, as a matter of fact it is! Arrest the lot of 'em, now! And start a Congressional Investigation, immediately!! :D :D
--
Why, yes! Certifiably so. Why do you ask?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16242044 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 15:49:12 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16242008 jimbo2150 :
said by AB See Profile :

Show 'em kiddie porn pictures to get the law passed...
Isn't it illegal to even possess any of this material???

Isn't it great, all the criminal activities the government can get away with these days?
--
- "Techie" Jim]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16242008 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 15:43:37 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241699 nixen :
said by N10Cities See Profile :

Hmmmm.....I'll bet companies like EMC and others that specialize in NAS storage solutions WOULD LOVE to see this come to pass....because their business would grow by leaps and bounds! Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPPA, etc already are a big boost...nothing really wrong with that...just an observation...
Actaully, no, disk makers won't really benefit. That's not the type of data you keep on disk. Companies, like StorageTeK and ADIC, that make large tape libraries and companies, like Iron Mountain, that store tapes would benefit most.

-tom
--
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -Louis D Brandeis]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241699 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 14:58:45 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241625 Geminimind : That's right and were paying them to snoop into our lives through federal taxes. They just want to be high tech peeping toms like we are some sort of reality tv show.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241625 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 14:49:43 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241572 N10Cities :
said by GhostDoggy See Profile :

Using child pornography as the excuse for attempting to mandate this kind of requirement is pure BS. They have alterior motives, but no one seems brave enough to confront them on it publicly.

Besides, trying to store millions of subscribers data for a year, let alone two, would be astronomical in costs. Heck, most can't support a robust NNTP server let alone capture and retain for periods of 6-8 times longer than the most premiere new service already afoot.

I think the DOJ needs to take a basic computing class, because they obviously are asking ISPs to turn straw into gold.
Hmmmm.....I'll bet companies like EMC and others that specialize in NAS storage solutions WOULD LOVE to see this come to pass....because their business would grow by leaps and bounds! Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPPA, etc already are a big boost...nothing really wrong with that...just an observation...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241572 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 14:40:48 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241107 Obliteration :
said by GhostDoggy See Profile :

Using child pornography as the excuse for attempting to mandate this kind of requirement is pure BS. They have alterior motives, but no one seems brave enough to confront them on it publicly.

Besides, trying to store millions of subscribers data for a year, let alone two, would be astronomical in costs. Heck, most can't support a robust NNTP server let alone capture and retain for periods of 6-8 times longer than the most premiere new service already afoot.

I think the DOJ needs to take a basic computing class, because they obviously are asking ISPs to turn straw into gold.
Agreed. Child sex offenders have existed many centuries ago to barely decide that the Internet will be a tremendous tool for helping them solve the cases a lot faster is BS when in reality it seems all they want to do is spy on people and invade their privacy.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241107 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:32:11 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241066 Jason Levine : The only reason for bringing child pornography into the mix is to give an attack point if someone opposes this. If someone says no then they will be painted as "pro-child pornography." (Alternatively, someone might say yes just to keep from being seen as "pro-child pornography.")

In reality, this is probably like the NSA phone records scandal. An effort to create a huge repository of information to help catch "bad guys" which will just generate a lot of false leads, invade privacy even more, and wind up being abused and/or expanded in scope to catch other "bad guys" in an effort to prove that the program was a success.
--
-Jason Levine
My Gallery | Jason's Toolbox | PCQandA.com | URateit.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241066 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:25:50 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241056 AB :
said by GhostDoggy See Profile :

Using child pornography as the excuse for attempting to mandate this kind of requirement is pure BS. They have alterior motives, but no one seems brave enough to confront them on it publicly.
You got that right! Show 'em kiddie porn pictures to get the law passed, then those investigations go out the window because they're too busy snooping into the business of ordinary people. This is what is commonly referred to as a "dog & pony show". Why? Because 100-150 years ago, at the carnival, pickpockets would circulate through the crowds while people's attention was diverted watching that cute doggie riding the pony. The ONLY purpose of the show was to facilitate the crime!
--
Why, yes! Certifiably so. Why do you ask?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16241056 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:24:37 EDT Re: DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16240932 GhostDoggy : Using child pornography as the excuse for attempting to mandate this kind of requirement is pure BS. They have alterior motives, but no one seems brave enough to confront them on it publicly.

Besides, trying to store millions of subscribers data for a year, let alone two, would be astronomical in costs. Heck, most can't support a robust NNTP server let alone capture and retain for periods of 6-8 times longer than the most premiere new service already afoot.

I think the DOJ needs to take a basic computing class, because they obviously are asking ISPs to turn straw into gold.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16240932 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:07:35 EDT DOJ Bullying? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16240880 latez : Well atleast the ISP's didnt shove their tale between their legs and submit once again. Perhaps the thought of AG Gonzales shoving it to them without the lube in the future frightened them off.
--
“The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity — the rest is overhead for the operating system.” —Nicholas Ambrose]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16240880 Mon, 05 Jun 2006 12:59:37 EDT