nanog mailing list archives

Re: IP-Echelon Compliance


From: Peter Kristolaitis <alter3d () alter3d ca>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:27:28 -0400

On 10/13/2015 11:30 AM, Bob Evans wrote:
WAIT WAIT - I know the solution to all of this.  Let's pass a law that
requires everyone to fill out a form to buy a device with a MAC address.
Make them wait 10 days to verify the buyer has never committed a digital
crime. While law enforcement puts it in a pile forms and pretends they can
verify through the process of piling and ignoring it. 10 days later, If
law enforcement doesn't call - the store can then call the buyer and tell
them they can pick up their new potential crime committing internet
device.

Background checks are great and all, but really what we need to do is restrict the ability of criminals to access illegal information, and we also need to get high-powered crime devices off of our streets.

To that end, we're currently working on drafting new legislation which we're calling the "Personal Access To Restricted Information Over Telecommunications Act" (PATRIOT Act) that will give the government the ability to remove illegal information from the internet, monitor global internet access so we can detect criminal activity, and also streamline the process for dealing with offenders. In talking with our intelligence and police services, we've found that there are several key areas that can be improved to be able to deal with threats faster and more efficiently. For example, "due process" is quite slow, requiring the gathering of something I believe is called "evidence", and we are currently examining ways to simply make it "process". This will give our law enforcement the tools that they desperately want.

On the hardware level, we need to get rid of all devices with more than 1 USB port. No one other than a criminal needs more than 1 external hard drive. This will inconvenience a very small number of people who also use USB ports for devices such as keyboards, mice and printers, but we commissioned a study that said the impact should be minor. We recommend that those affected by this change look at alternatives such as "PS2". The government computing infrastructure has been using this standard for several years now with great success.

Limiting USB ports on a device introduces another problem -- the "USB hub loophole", which we will address with future legislation. We will need to work with the ATF and Homeland Security to identify the best way to deal with this issue. We will probably need to bring in CIA and NSA as well, to monitor the production and sale of these devices both abroad and domestically. We are also in talks at the UN to introduce a new, multinational, multilateral civilian oversight committee to monitor and regulate the international trade of these dangerous items. However, we are having difficulties getting some member states to accept the inspection requirements, and talks are ongoing.

Next, we're going to limit the general availability of network connections to no more than 32kbit/sec in either direction. Faster network connections will be available, but you will have to register with the government and pay for a tax stamp. This ensures that criminals can't misuse high-speed network connections, unless they can afford to pay $200.

Finally, we are going to introduce a total digital-crime-device ban to help tackle the problem in high-crime areas. We are going to give states and municipalities the ability to make "digital-free zones" where the possession of digital crime devices is prohibited. This will result in the complete elimination of digital crimes committed in public areas such as schools and movie theaters, because it will be double-illegal to commit crimes there.


Current thread: