September 2001 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: On Internet and social responsibility
by David Charlap 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

David Schwartz wrote: > > Because if American companies want to spread the speech of foreign > terrorists, that's their right. The government of the United States > should not be prosecuting them for the content of their speech. Without stating an opinon on whether or not it is right to shutdown these sites, let me point out two things that you seem to be forgetting: 1: The courts have repeatedly held that incite to riot is not a form of protected speech. A logical inference here is that incite to war is not protected either. 2: The US Constitution does not guarantee the rights of non-citizens residing in foreign nations. Even if they buy a web page from a US hosting service. -- David

2 1

Re: Yahoogroups and Carnivore
by Steven M. Bellovin 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

In message <5.1.0.14.2.20010917155726.049e6708(a)127.0.0.1>, "Patrick W. Gilmore" writes: > >At 03:42 PM 9/17/2001 -0400, Cristopher Daniluk wrote: > >That's just a silly statement, it's a text processor/parser. It's another > >layer. Of course its going to have an effect. On the average person, I would > >venture to guess its overwhelmingly negligible, but it could very well > >bottleneck someone like Yahoo. > >My understanding is that it is no inline, it uses a "monitor port" on a >switch which duplicates all traffic. > >If that is the case, then it is not a silly statement, it is factually correct >. > >Can anyone confirm or deny the above? > Your understanding correct. They use a splitter, and put the monitoring machine on one of the legs. (The independent review of Carnivore is at http://www.usdoj.gov:80/jmd/publications/carniv_entry.htm; comments on that review are at http://www.crypto.com/papers/carnivore_report_comments.html) --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb http://www.wilyhacker.com

1 0

RE: Yahoogroups and Carnivore
by Roeland Meyer 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

|> From: Jay Fenello [mailto:Jay@Fenello.com] |> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 12:26 PM |> |> As of yesterday, the performance of Yahoogroup's has |> degraded from a couple minutes, to a couple of hours |> between posting and distribution. It is rumored that |> this is due to Carnivore being installed at major |> ISPs throughout the country. |> |> Any insights? Carnivore is a very bad and expensive joke. The counter move is to simply move all content into a SSH or MS-PPTP VPN. Every *nix server can do both and every Win2Kserver and workstation can do the latter. Then VOIP can be used through the tunnel. Voila! ... fully mil-spec encrypted communications. All Carnivore does is burn bandwidth and provide choke-points, aka single points of failure.

1 0

Re: Yahoogroups and Carnivore
by John Neiberger 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

I don't know about Yahoogroups, but on 9/13 I received an email from Sprint stating that a huge number of backbone routers would be down for emergency software upgrades scheduled for today. This seems at least a bit suspicious and my first thought was "Carnivore." I can't imagine why they'd have to do an emergency software upgrade on forty routers all in the same time frame. Well, that's not entirely true. I suppose if they were suffering from some buggy code and hadn't noticed it until they had already changed the IOS in all of those routers, they'd want to remedy the problem as quickly as possible. Still, it made me wonder. John On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 15:25:52 -0400, Jay Fenello wrote: | | | | As of yesterday, the performance of Yahoogroup's has | degraded from a couple minutes, to a couple of hours | between posting and distribution. It is rumored that | this is due to Carnivore being installed at major | ISPs throughout the country. | | Any insights? | | Jay. | | +++ | | Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching | http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 | http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support | http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World | ----------------------------------------------------------- | "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men | everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler | _______________________________________________________ http://inbox.excite.com

1 0

RE: What Worked - What Didn't
by Roeland Meyer 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

1 0

RE: Yahoogroups and Carnivore
by Joe Blanchard 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

FYI, Link about Carnivore, how it is Advertised to work. http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/carnivore/carnivore2.htm Cheers -Joe > ---------- > From: Larry Diffey[SMTP:ldiffey@technologyforward.com] > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 12:41 PM > To: Jay Fenello > Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Yahoogroups and Carnivore > > > From what I understand of Carnivore (now known as DCS1000) it's a logging > tool more than anything. It doesn't stop anything from going through > based > on content, it just logs the content and the Feds come in later and > retrieve > their box. > > Yahoo could be screening stuff themselves just to cover their backsides. > > Or, they could just have a lot of increased traffic due to last weeks > terrorism. > > Regards, > > Larry Diffey > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jay Fenello" <Jay(a)Fenello.com> > To: <nanog(a)merit.edu> > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 12:25 PM > Subject: Yahoogroups and Carnivore > > > > > > > > > > As of yesterday, the performance of Yahoogroup's has > > degraded from a couple minutes, to a couple of hours > > between posting and distribution. It is rumored that > > this is due to Carnivore being installed at major > > ISPs throughout the country. > > > > Any insights? > > > > Jay. > > > > +++ > > > > Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching > > http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 > > http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support > > http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men > > everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler > > >

1 0

RE: On Internet and social responsibility
by Dan Hollis 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

On Mon, 17 Sep 2001, David Schwartz wrote: > >How it's > >applicable to foreign terrorist organization that uses American company to > >spread its ideas? > Because if American companies want to spread the speech of foreign > terrorists, that's their right. The government of the United States should > not be prosecuting them for the content of their speech. But you *can* be prosecuted on content, e.g. death threats. -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]

2 1

RE: On Internet and social responsibility
by Greg Mirsky 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

Sorry, but I want to point out that Vadim (and I'll second his opinion) was talking about a particular site www.Kavkaz.org which is set by Chechen terrorists (sorry again, I wouldn't call them "rebels" since it an insult to those who rebel for cause). Last time I've checked Chechnya was not part of USA and thus none of them is a US citizen unless there are mercenaries. If that's the case then why you're talking about Freedom of Speech and First Amendment? How it's applicable to foreign terrorist organization that uses American company to spread its ideas? Or perhaps you're more tolerable to Chechen terrorists using American info-space then if it would be bin Laden using it? Would your company host a site that posts Laden's fatwahs (sp?)? Would you provide them with 24*7 customer support? If not, please try to explain to me, where's difference? Regards, Greg -----Original Message----- From: Andy Walden [mailto:andy@tigerteam.net] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 6:02 PM To: David Schwartz Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: RE: On Internet and social responsibility On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, David Schwartz wrote: > > I think you misunderstand what free speech is and means. Freedom of speech > means the right to express those ideas you wish using that which is yours to > use. It does not include the right to commandeer other people's presses. Common misconception that Freedom of Speech has anything to do with you or me and what we tell each other. Actually Freedom of Speech means freedom from governement censorship, and has nothing do with with U.S. Citizen to Citizen communications. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

7 6

Re: On Internet and social responsibility
by Joel Baker 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 12:10:40PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 09:08:51 -0400, Greg Mirsky wrote: > > >Or perhaps you're more tolerable to Chechen terrorists using American > >info-space then if it would be bin Laden using it? Would your company > >host a site that posts Laden's fatwahs (sp?)? Would you provide them > >with 24*7 customer support? If not, please try to explain to me, where's > >difference? > > No, I wouldn't. The difference is, my company is mine and it's my right > to choose what speech I wish to carry over my network. Another network > carrying someone else's speech is not mine, and the principle of freedom > of speech demands that I not use my government as a club to suppress the > speech of others. > > I realize this might be considered a complex distinction by people not > from this country. But it's absolutely fundamental to the philosophical > principles on which America was founded. Foreigners sometimes think it's > nutty. Another fairly important point to it - a US company also has every right to limit what you can say with their service (by AUPs, etc) in the contract you sign to obtain service. Censorship beyond this is a matter of breach, rather than First Amendment rights. Just as you are not guaranteed any sort of audience, you also aren't guaranteed a podium from which to speak, in most cases (there are certain specific exceptions to this, of course). IANAL, of course. File complaints with the relevant RFC-specified addresses at the carrier, if you believe it to be in violation of their AUP, or in criminal violation of libel laws (please note that slander is only spoken, not written, and libel has a fairly specific definition; if you don't know, you shouldn't be claiming this without retaining legal counsel, yadda yadda etc). -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com lucifer(a)lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/

1 0

NANOG PGP keysigning in Oakland
by bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com 17 Sep '01

17 Sep '01

We will be holding a PGP Key signing party at the IETF meeting in Oakland. We have been scheduled to meet <at a time/venue to be selected by the NANOG organizers, but I'm presuming the evening of 22 October>. The procedure we will use is the following: o People who wish to participate should email an ASCII extract of their PGP public key to <bmanning(a)karoshi.com> by noon on Monday 22 October, 2001. Please include a subject line of "NANOG PGP KEY", and please avoid MIME-encrypting your e-mail. (I will be running the entire mail folder file through PGP, and PGP-keys that are base-64 encoded will get ignored unless I take manual action to fix things. I will try do the manual fixup, but I make no guarantees about catching all of them.) The method of generating the ASCII extract under Unix is: pgp -kxa my_email_address mykey.asc (pgp 2.6.2) pgpk -xa my_email_address > mykey.asc (pgp 5.x) gpg --export -a my_email_address > mykey.asc (gpg) If you're using Windows or Macintosh, hopefully it will be Intuitively Obvious (tm) using the GUI interface how to generate an ASCII armored key that begins "-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----". o By 6pm on Monday, you will be able to fetch complete key ring from the following URL with all of the keys that were submitted: http://weblet.ep.net/nanog23.pgp o At 10:30pm, come prepared with the PGP Key fingerprint of your PGP public key; we will have handouts with all of the key fingerprints of the keys that people have mailed in. o In turn, readers at the front of the room will recite people's keys; as your key fingerprint is read, stand up, and at the end of reading of your PGP key fingerprint, acknowledge that the fingerprint as read was correct. o Later that evening, or perhaps when you get home, you can sign the keys corresponding to the fingerprints which you were able to verify on the handout; note that it is advisable that you only sign keys of people when you have personal knowledge that the person who stood up during the reading of his/her fingerprint really is the person which he/she claimed to be. o Submit the keys you have signed to the PGP keyservers. A good one to use is the one at MIT: simply send mail containing the ascii armored version of your PGP public key to <pgp(a)pgp.mit.edu>. Note that you don't have to have a laptop with you; if you don't have any locally trusted computing resources during the key signing party, you can make notes on the handout, and then take the handout home and sign the keys later. - bill

1 0