Re: Carrier Grade NAT

[Chris Boyd <cboyd () gizmopartners com>]

On Jul 29, 2014, at 11:54 AM, <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Jul 2014 11:42:31 -0500, Chris Boyd said:
>
> > There's probably going to be some interesting legal fallout from that
> > practice.  As an ISP customer, I'd be furious to find out that my
> > communications had been intercepted due to the bad behavior of another user.
>
> See the various lawsuits against the NSA - the vast majority have been summarily
> dismissed because the plaintiffs couldn't produce evidence their communications
> had in fact been intercepted, and thus they didn't have standing to sue.

True, but there is a difference in this case, since I could probably find a way to do discovery of the warrant/subpoena 
that was delivered to the ISP--assuming it's not an NSL.  I would assume that going into court with evidence of the 
warrant/subpoena would be sufficient to grant standing.  Or the notice of intercepted communications that I've seen a 
few times would work too.

In $DAYJOB, we're all colo/cloud, so the stuff we get specifies a specific date.  Have not come across any that specify 
a few seconds of time as another poster noted.

In any case IANAL, so who knows until the cases start showing up on the dockets.....

--Chris