----- Original Message -----
From: George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 9:59 PM
Subject: Re: [smartBridges] DHCP vs static


> Mark
> In Europe after 911, ISP's were required to keep their logs for an
extended
> period of time, I think 3 months for the purpose of security. I'm sure
their
> is some European ISP's on these list somewhere who can explain this better
> than I.
>
> This country is following suite and a number of states have passed laws
that
> a lot of us either don't know about or understand very well. I wouldn't be
> surprised if it wasn't a result of the new Patriot Act and extended rights
> of investigating and information gathering of our police agencies.

That's no excuse to not fight it tooth and nail.

The euros might accept such things, it's no reason for us to lay down and
die.

>
> One such law was that NAT was illegal or so it seemed that is what the law
> said.
>
> Any ISP who would play with fire, by not co-operating with the authorities
> investigating criminal behavior might just find himself in violation of
one
> of these new laws and also charged with obstruction of justice.

Now where did I say that I would refuse to cooperate with law enforcement
prosecuting a crime?   Nowhere.

> Don't you think it would be wise not to go the route of 'head butting' the
> authorities when it comes to your own families' well being?
> Generally in business, one wouldn't start taking political stances on
> delicate issues that have an adverse affect of their future ability to
> conduct business.

Playing dead and letting government tromp on you works only for a short
time, and then they come for you anyway.

No way on earth would I want to be liable for having my information be
considered evidence in a criminal trial.   I cannot imagine the legal
liability of certifying that what I provide is sufficiently reliable to
prosecute a crime.   If the FBI or whoever wants access to produce their own
data, more power to them.  But asking me to certify MY records as being
infallible?  Forget it.

>
> Just my opinion.
> George
>

Besides, I am not going to certify that my system cannot be "hacked" and
that any logs or records cannot be forged or tampered with.

No WAY am I going through that.    Anything I ever give them will be
declared up front.  "This information is supplied as data only.  No
assurances of it's accuracy or c ompleteness can be made, or is given.   No
testimony of it being factual or accurate will be made under oath, nor will
any person testify to its validity".

If they want to prosecute me for that, BRING IT ON.    If that's the case,
our goose is cooked and we as a nation have nothing further to lose.

The outcome can only improve things.

NEOFAST.NET
North
East
Oregon
FAST
Net
mark(at)neofast.net



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 7/18/03

The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges 
<yournickname>
To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges)
Archives: http://archives.part-15.org  

Reply via email to