Lauren Weinstein -- Microsoft's Police State Vision? Exec Calls for Internet "Driver's Licenses"

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
Date: February 1, 2010 7:11:50 PM EST
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Microsoft's Police State Vision? Exec Calls for Internet "Driver's Licenses"



                     Microsoft's Police State Vision? 
              Exec Calls for Internet "Driver's Licenses"

              http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000676.html


Greetings.  About a week ago, in "Google and the Battle for the Soul
of the Internet" ( http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000673.html )
I noted that:

   Even here in the U.S., one of the most common Internet-related
   questions that I receive is also one of the most deeply disturbing:
   Why can't the U.S. require an Internet "driver's license" so that
   there would be no way (ostensibly) to do anything anonymously on the
   Net?

   After I patiently explain why that would be a horrendous idea, based
   on basic principles of free speech as applied to the reality of the
   Internet -- most people who approached me with the "driver's license"
   concept seem satisfied with my take on the topic, but the fact that
   the question keeps coming up so frequently shows the depth of
   misplaced fears driven, ironically, by disinformation and the lack of
   accurate information.

So when someone who really should know better starts to push this sort
of incredibly dangerous concept, it's time to bump up to orange alert
at a minimum, and the trigger is no less than Craig Mundie, chief
research and strategy officer for Microsoft.

At the World Economic Forum in Davos two days ago, Mundie explicitly
called for an "Internet Driver's License": "If you want to drive a
car you have to have a license to say that you are capable of driving
a car, the car has to pass a test to say it is fit to drive and you
have to have insurance." ( http://bit.ly/aWJ2ed )

When applied to the Internet, this is the kind of logic that must
gladden the heart of China's rulers, where Microsoft has already
announced their continuing, happy compliance with the country's
human-rights-abusive censorship regime.

Dictators present and past would all appreciate the value of such a
license -- let's call it an "IDL" -- by its ability to potentially
provide all manner of benefits to current or would-be police states.

After all, a license implies a goal of absolute identification and
zero anonymity -- extremely valuable when trying to track down
undesirable political and other free speech uttering undesirables.
And while the reality of Internet technology suggests that such
identity regimes would be vulnerable to technological bypass and
fascinating "joe job" identity-diversion schemes, criminal penalties
for their use could be kept sufficiently draconian to assure that most
of the population will be kowtowing compliantly.

I used the term "police state" in the text and title above, and I
don't throw this concept around loosely.

The Internet has become integral to the most private and personal
aspects of our lives -- health, commerce, and entertainment to name
just a few on an ever expanding list.  While there are clearly
situations on the Internet where we want and/or need to be
appropriately identified, there are many more where identification is
not only unnecessary but could be incredibly intrusive and subject to
enormous abuse.

And I might add, it is also inevitable that serious crooks would find
ways around any Internet identification systems -- one obvious
technique would be to divert blame to innocent parties through
manipulation and theft of associated IDL identification credentials.

It was perhaps inevitable that the same "Hide!  Here come the
terrorists!" scare tactics used to promote easily thwarted naked
airport scanners and domestic wiretapping operations, not to mention
other PATRIOT and Homeland Security abuses, are now being repurposed
in furtherance of gaining an iron grip on the communications
technology -- the Internet -- that enables the truly free speech so
terrifying to various governments around the world.

It's true that some persons advocating police state IDL concepts are
not themselves in any way inherently evil -- they can for example be
well-meaning but incredibly short-sighted.

However, I would be less than candid if I didn't admit that I'm
disappointed, though not terribly surprised -- especially in light of
Microsoft's explicit continuing support of Chinese censorship against
human rights -- to hear a top Microsoft executive pushing a concept
that is basic to making the Internet Police State a reality.

In the final analysis, evil is as evil does.

--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren () vortex com
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
  - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, NNSquad
  - Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org
Founder, GCTIP - Global Coalition 
  for Transparent Internet Performance - http://www.gctip.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/laurenweinstein




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com