2 edits | Hearings unlikely to get very far The current admin is no different than the previous admin in wanting the ABILITY to tap in to the internet in the interests of national security. We can argue all day on whether the tech can be abused or not. But, ultimately the government will want the capability, even if court approvals are needed to use it.
So somehow I doubt this drive to prevent the rollout at all is going anywhere. There is a bi-partisan desire of the gov't to have spying capabilities available for use.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
|
|
 AVDRespice, Adspice, ProspicePremium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ | said by fAcEtIOUs:The current admin is no different than the previous admin in wanting the ABILITY to tap in to the internet in the interests of national security. You don't need DPI at the ISP level for that.
--
Team JON. |
|
| said by AVD:said by fAcEtIOUs:The current admin is no different than the previous admin in wanting the ABILITY to tap in to the internet in the interests of national security. You don't need DPI at the ISP level for that. No, but it will make it easier.
And the government(DARPA) is already looking at ways to interpret all the captured info:
»www.readwriteweb.com/archives/da···_web.php
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
While I agree with your points about governments desires there tk, this could be used for consumer privacy purposes. We all know the potential and actual abuses that dpi can cause. This could serve 2 purposes; it could curb current and future abuses, and it could also be used as a tool to inform the congress about dpi and it's possible uses. This way when Congress sees companies that abuse dpi, they can not say they never knew what it was!
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils! |
|
| said by S_engineer:While I agree with your points about governments desires there tk, this could be used for consumer privacy purposes. We all know the potential and actual abuses that dpi can cause. This could serve 2 purposes; it could curb current and future abuses, and it could also be used as a tool to inform the congress about dpi and it's possible uses. This way when Congress sees companies that abuse dpi, they can not say they never knew what it was! Amazing how it is brought into the spotlight now. |
|
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
At the moment, there seems to be some hesitancy to saying that the ECPA applies to DPI. (Why wouldn't it? I don't know.)
DPI is the internet version of wiretapping. Wiretapping has good and lawful uses and the permissions and restrictions for wiretapping are set in law. DPI is a useful tool for network maintenance and other lawful purposes, nobody wants to end those. What we do want is clarity over when its use on our communications networks crosses the line into inappropriate uses.
discl.: I am Chief Technologist of the Open Technology Initiative of the New America Foundation and I speak for them as well as myself on this issue. (As a long-time member of DSLReports, I usually speak only for myself and therefore don't use such a disclosure.)
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL
Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth, or by misleading the innocent. --Spock and McCoy stardate 5029.5 |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:said by AVD:You don't need DPI at the ISP level for that. No, but it will make it easier. Actually, no; since it's easier to interpret data if you got information from all sources collected into a central repository, which is then processed using state of the art packet inspection/data mining equipment, than getting however much information from disparate equipment you have no real control over from random ISPs. So, for "national security," what they'd really be after would be a method of getting a copy of the information stream, which they can analyze later and/or in relative "real-time." |
|
| reply to funchords
In Canada they want to make this the norm without court oversight.
What a great country for Internet |
|
