how-to block ads
|
bzmeteorite
join:2006-02-15
Nipomo, CA
1 edit | This is only the start... Things such as this are endangering our online rights. That isn't to say looking at child porn is a right, but there are already clear processes for investigating people who are breaking the law. Look at CALEA and the whole warrant process. Oh, wait, that went down the drain long ago.
Not only that, what does this mean for the common carrier status? I imagine things such as this will endanger the status; for as soon as something illegal slips through, one could argue that the ISP has the capability of knowing whether something is illegal or not and that they missed it.
I fear for the future of online privacy and the mom-and-pop ISPs. | |
|  NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: This is only the start... said by bzmeteorite  :Not only that, what does this mean for the common carrier status? What, exactly, is this "common carrier" status? I believe this is a sorely misunderstood subject. | |
| 
technick
Premium
join:2000-12-16
Loganville, GA | I just took a CALEA training course and its complete bullshit. | |
| | Done_Posting
Shoot to kill
Premium
join:2003-08-22
Toledo, OH
 ·buckeye cable
| Re: This is only the start... said by technick :I just took a CALEA training course and its complete bullshit. The course was, or CALEA was? I'm guessing you meant CALEA since I happen to feel it's a flaming pile of horseshit myself...
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-768 in your basement... | |
| | | bzmeteorite
join:2006-02-15
Nipomo, CA
| Re: This is only the start... said by Done_Posting :said by technick :I just took a CALEA training course and its complete bullshit. The course was, or CALEA was? I'm guessing you meant CALEA since I happen to feel it's a flaming pile of horseshit myself... CALEA seems to be poorly designed in some respects, for one, there is no publicly published open standard out there that I am aware of, and two, the cost burden is completely on ISPs. That may not matter for the large ISPs, but for the smaller ones I'm sure it does.
--
What happens when you combine common sense and an outspoken personality? | |
| | | | Mike_27
Premium
join:2004-05-15
Gardiner, MT
| Re: This is only the start... said by bzmeteorite :CALEA seems to be poorly designed in some respects, for one, there is no publicly published open standard out there that I am aware of, and two, the cost burden is completely on ISPs. That may not matter for the large ISPs, but for the smaller ones I'm sure it does. Here's a public standard:
WISPA CALEA Standards (Versions 1 and 2) as produced by the WISPA CALEA Committee and ratified in May 2008.
»www.wispa.org/calea/WCS/
There are also cost effective solutions for small providers:
Netequalizer: »www.netequalizer.com/caleafaq.php
Mikrotik: »wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Calea
HTH,
Mike | |
| | | | | bzmeteorite
join:2006-02-15
Nipomo, CA
1 edit | Re: This is only the start... I recall some time ago that WISPA was working with the FBI on working on a standard, great to see it's been finished and published.
»www.isp-planet.com/fixed_wireles···faq.html
Edit: I just relooked up OpenCALEA. It seems they have made considerable progress from when I last looked at them. Interesting.
--
What happens when you combine common sense and an outspoken personality? | |
| | | bzmeteorite
join:2006-02-15
Nipomo, CA
| Re: This is only the start... said by funchords :said by bzmeteorite :Not only that, what does this mean for the common carrier status? I imagine things such as this will endanger the status; ISPs are not considered Common Carriers, a flaw that is causing a seemingly endless pile of problems. That is what I have always understood, at least, that seems to be implied by the FCC requiring that ISPs are CALEA compliant, and CALEA labels them as Common Carriers.
If I happen to be wrong, please correct me, I don't like spreading misinformation.
--
What happens when you combine common sense and an outspoken personality? | |
| | | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: This is only the start... said by bzmeteorite :That is what I have always understood, at least, that seems to be implied by the FCC requiring that ISPs are CALEA compliant, and CALEA labels them as Common Carriers. Not that this is an authoritative source of any information:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communicat···ment_Act
But there seems to be a distinction between "common carriers", and ISP ("facilities-based broadband Internet access providers"), and CALEA classes both as, “telecommunications carriers”.
Does anybody tossing the term "common carrier" about have any clue as to what it really means?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
| | | | bzmeteorite
join:2006-02-15
Nipomo, CA
1 edit | Re: This is only the start... said by NormanS :But there seems to be a distinction between "common carriers", and ISP ("facilities-based broadband Internet access providers"), and CALEA classes both as, “telecommunications carriers”. Does anybody tossing the term "common carrier" about have any clue as to what it really means? Thank you, I wasn't aware of that. So many intricacies of the laws out there - quite daunting. | |
| | | | Airwolf7
Premium
join:2004-12-12
Franklin, KY
·AT&T Southeast
| said by NormanS :Does anybody tossing the term "common carrier" about have any clue as to what it really means? Planes, trains, and automobiles.
It was meant to level the playing field between companies needing to transport goods from one place to another so that one company would not have a competitive advantage over another one due to getting an "under the table" good buddy deal from transportation companies such as the railroad industry.
In the telecommunications industry I believe it applies to the carriers that the ISPs get their connection to the Internet from and not to the ISPs themselves. | |
| | | | | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA | Re: This is only the start... Finally; somebody who actually has a clue! | |
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| For the Children is the most abused method of getting new abuses of privacy passed. fighting piracy is another abuse that usually gets extended from a for the children effort.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
1 edit | Re: This is only the start... said by Kearnstd :For the Children is the most abused method of getting new abuses of... "For the Children"... I believe one family law attorney as labeled accusations of child sex abuse in divorce proceedings as the "atom bomb of family law".
I am mindful of several latter day witch hunts, including the McMartin Pre-School case in Manhattan Beach, California, the Wenatchee, Washington child abuse scare, and the Satanic Ritual Scare in Kern County, California.
Fighting child abuse is politically safe; being accused of it is the Kiss of Death.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
| | | |
|
·