-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Mark Newton <newton@internode.com.au> wrote:
On 04/02/2011, at 3:43 PM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Mark Newton <newton@internode.com.au> wrote:
On 04/02/2011, at 2:13 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
An armed FBI special agent shows up at your facility and tells your ranking manager to "shut down the Internet".
Turn off the room lights, salute, and shout, "Mission Accomplished." The FBI dude with the gun won't know the difference.
No. The correct answer is that in the U.S., if the Agent in question has a valid subpoena or N.S.L., you must comply.
Subpoenas and NSLs are used to gather information, not to shut down telcos. They're just an enforceable request for records.
Considering that politicians in the US have suggested that they need "kill switch" legislation passed before they can do it, and further considering that "kill switch" legislation doesn't currently exist, what lawful means do you anticipate an FBI special agent to rely on in making such a request?
I'm not actually in the US. In a question arising from the Egypt demonstrations earlier this week, Australia's Communications Minister said he didn't think the law as written at the moment provided the government with the lawful ability to shut down telecommunications services. http://delimiter.com.au/2011/02/03/no-internet-kill-switch-for-australia- says-conroy/
I share your sentiment. One of the best commentaries I have read lately on this issue was earlier today: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/government/ive-changed-my-mind-america-must-never - -allow-an-internet-kill-switch-heres-why/9982 Worth a quick read. - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003) wj8DBQFNS49Qq1pz9mNUZTMRAg63AJ9XifxhugBVp9eyMrGQW7W9uKiAMACgor23 ISBUTZgvbwKKjJ5qBnJxPrg= =O3vq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/