Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam!
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:09:05 -0500
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:32:22 PST, "Gregory A. Gilliss" <ggilliss () netpublishing com> said:
BTW, which ISP was that who decided to filter your mail - that's got to be a violation of their agreement, let alone a Federal offense.
That will depend on the Terms of Service that the recipient agreed to with the ISP. If the ISP reserved the right to filter mail, or similar terms, and the user agreed to it, it's not a violation of the ToS. (You *did* read the ToS when you signed it, right? ;) Regarding "a Federal offense" - probably not. http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/pIch119.html 18 USC 2511 (2)(a)(i): It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for an operator of a switchboard, or an officer, employee, or agent of a provider of wire or electronic communication service, whose facilities are used in the transmission of a wire or electronic communication, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service, except that a provider of wire communication service to the public shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service quality control checks. "protection of the rights or property of the provider" - basically means that the ISP has the right to intercept and block spam if it's needed to protect the ISP's servers from overload. If anybody wants to cite contraditory case or statute law, feel free. I'd not be surprised if there's something overriding this in the US Code or CFR's.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam!, (continued)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Scott Taylor (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Michael Gale (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Daniel (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Michael Gale (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Steffen Kluge (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Michael Gale (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Chris Ruvolo (Nov 12)
- Re: PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! onedo (Nov 12)
- Re: PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Shawn McMahon (Nov 13)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Scott Taylor (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 12)