IP: Privacy issues raised -- DO READ San Jose Mercury News Good article on

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2000 18:07:59 -0500
> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> From: Dave Wilson <dave () wilson net>
> Subject: Re: IP: Re: Bakers note
>
>
> Sometimes I really do get in front...<g>
> Distribute as much (or as little) as you want.
>
> -dave
>
> http://www.mercurycenter.com/premium/business/docs/hack11.htm
>
> Published Friday, February 11, 2000, in the San
>                       Jose Mercury News
>
>                       Privacy issues raised
>
>                       Hacker attacks: Experts worry that technological fixes
>                       being worked on may compromise rights of individuals
>                       online.
>
>                       BY DAVID L. WILSON
>                       Mercury News Washington Bureau
>
> WASHINGTON -- Internet experts and civil liberty advocates are raising
> concerns that the recent rash of Web-site attacks may provoke the kind of
> technological fixes that could make the online world more secure at the
> expense of damaging individual privacy.
>
> The anonymous vandals who launched assaults on some of the Web's busiest
> sites this week used a technique known as a ``distributed denial of
> service'' attack. Finding the source of such attacks and repelling them is
> extremely difficult, partly because the Internet is by design a free and
> open system in which anonymity is the rule. Experts say, however, that
> could easily change.
>
> They fear that some people may call for building tight controls into the
> Internet's infrastructure, which would allow the tracking of the movements
> of individuals as they navigate through cyberspace.
>
> This would make it easier to protect commercial Web sites and police
> against online crime. But in such an environment, law-abiding users might
> also decide it's not safe to look at information on controversial topics,
> political issues or health matters for fear that someone could monitor
> their movements and use that information to harm them, professionally or
> socially.
>
> ``There's no question that when this kind of event occurs it garners
> support for efforts to be more restrictive on access and more intrusive on
> privacy,'' said Gene Spafford, director of Purdue University's Center for
> Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security and one of the
> world's leading experts on computer security.
>
> Civil rights advocates agree, and insist that the Internet must continue to
> maintain a balance between security and privacy. ``Without privacy on the
> Internet, you lose the freedom to explore and discover. It chills free
> speech,'' said Tara L. Lemmey, president of the Electronic Frontier
> Foundation.
>
> The concern is not so much new laws -- at least in the United States -- but
> new technology that would boost security at an unacceptable price to
> personal liberty.
>
>  Changes could be simple
>
>  Instituting such a change could be a mere matter of distributing and
> installing new hardware and software. As Harvard law Professor Lawrence
> Lessig argues in his new book, ``Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace,'' it is
> not legal codes that define how we use systems like the Internet, but
> software code. Programmers and hardware engineers who will define the
> limits on human behavior and society in cyberspace.
>
> For instance, after Intel Corp. introduced its Pentium III microprocessor,
> privacy advocates were shocked to discover that each new chip broadcast a
> unique identification code when it was connected to a network. Intel
> developed the feature to make networking more secure, and company
> representatives initially seemed baffled by cries that such a system would
> undermine privacy. Intel eventually agreed to ship each chip with the
> feature turned off.
>
>  Ongoing fight
>
> Part of the reason for the increasing fears for privacy are related to
> ongoing political battles that center on the issue of anonymity. For
> instance, laws aimed at restricting sexually oriented material distributed
> via the Internet to adults have been struck down by the courts, largely
> because there is no way to ensure that only adults get such material, since
> proving identity is cumbersome in cyberspace.
>
> Since it's nearly impossible to determine whether a visitor to a Web site
> is an adult, Web site operators have argued convincingly that the only way
> to protect themselves from possible legal action would be to stop
> displaying any material that could be found inappropriate for minors --
> resulting in the chilling censorship of such content as works of art that
> feature nudity, AIDS information and guidance about birth control.
>
> Limiting all speech in cyberspace to speech appropriate for a child
> violates the First Amendment right to free speech, the Supreme Court has
> ruled. But legislators on both the federal and state levels are still
> trying to enact restrictions that could withstand judicial scrutiny.
>
> Privacy advocates acknowledge the seductive power behind the logic of
> giving up a basic liberty in return for a safer environment. But they warn
> that such a bargain is the hallmark of an authoritarian society.
>
> Asked if it wouldn't be worth giving up some privacy on the Internet in
> return for more security, the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Lemmey
> laughed bitterly and said, ``I think China is currently trying to deploy a
> system like that.''
>
>                       Intended effect?
>
> Ironically, the push for tighter controls on the Internet may be precisely
> what the perpetrators of these recent attacks do not want to see happen.
>
> Many computer ``crackers,'' as malevolent hackers are known, subscribe to a
> rudimentary political manifesto that encourages random strikes at
> commercial enterprises on the Internet, arguing that corporations have
> polluted the pure, unfettered environment of cyberspace in which people
> should freely share resources.
>
> ``The people who do this kind of thing often claim they want a more open
> network, more anonymous access,'' said Spafford, of Purdue University.
> ``Yet this behavior leads to pressure to restrict those very behaviors.''
>
>
> Contact David Wilson at dwilson () sjmercury com or (202) 383-6020.
>
> "He who laughs last thinks slowest."
> Dave Wilson