Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
RE: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content
From: "Stout, Bill" <StoutB () pios com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 21:14:38 -0400
This is a rough topic. If you run a company, of course you want to make sure no bad things get in, and no 'good stuff' gets out. Just make sure that's well understood in the employment contract. The vehicle used to get stuff in and out is irrelevant. Data generated within a corporation belongs to the company, and the company could legally search things like backpacks, e-mail, disks, and bodies, to some varied extreme. Unfortunately each step creates a precedent. You and your car can be searched on the street for illegal items or alcohol. At airports your luggage and body are searched for illegal items. Why not your computer? Apparently British customs has begun searching laptop disks for illegal porno, ignoring the concept of ownership and 'privacy'. I understand 1984 was written about the behavior of the British government anyway, a government past Americans have proudly revolted against, and a system present Americans stupidly embrace duplicate. While many in the U.S. claim their homes are 'privacy territory', it actually belongs to the county, since though you may live in the boonies, you need a permit to move dirt or change your own kitchen sink (Santa Clara co., CA). If a judge can issue a search warrant for your property or computer, you must not own it either, someone else owns it, it simply requires higher approval to access it. It's only a matter of time before we're offered digital certificates, than assigned them, and required to use certificates for 'security'. If our bodies can be searched without permission, we must not own that either, therefore certificate micro-strips may as well be embedded within our palms too, right? Solves that lost wallet problem too, since credit cards, SSNs, and IDs are merely weak spoofable certificates. The underlying topic is rough, since if a user refuses a search in any case, he must be hiding something, and by law is assumed guilty of committing some crime (drunk driving precident: Refusing alcohol search of body fluid finds one guilty of being intoxicated). Policing 'your' data though, is equivalent to policing your thoughts, since you commit your thoughts to e-mail and files. We create the beast we rant against. Bill Stout
Current thread:
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content, (continued)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Chris Crozier (Aug 09)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Perry E. Metzger (Aug 09)
- RE: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Chris Crozier (Aug 10)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Joseph S. D. Yao (Aug 10)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Adam Shostack (Aug 11)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Perry E. Metzger (Aug 09)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Steve Bellovin (Aug 09)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Brian Steele (Aug 10)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Jeremy Epstein (Aug 11)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Dean_Ethier (Aug 11)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Bennett Todd (Aug 12)
- RE: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Stout, Bill (Aug 12)
- RE: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Gary Crumrine (Aug 12)
- RE: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Gary Crumrine (Aug 12)
- RE: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Readwin, Neil (Aug 12)
- Re: Screening Outgoing Mail for Content Chris Crozier (Aug 09)