nanog mailing list archives
Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ?
From: Jean-Francois Mezei <jfmezei_nanog () vaxination ca>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:07:49 -0400
On 2016-09-15 16:03, Owen DeLong wrote:
Please explain to me how one modifies a request or response without managing to “control the content” or “influence the meaning or purpose”? Blocking a request or simply failing to answer MIGHT be within the law, but returning a false record certainly seems to me that it would run afoul of the law cited.
Blocking would also be a form of control. Because Section 36 has a "unless authorized by CRTC" escape clause, one has to show to the CRTC that granting permission would be bad. Since court proceedings have already begun, it is likely the CRTC will be involved in court, at which point, the more evidence they have, the more chances they have of arguing against the QC loterry censorship.
Current thread:
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ?, (continued)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Stephane Bortzmeyer (Sep 13)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Marcus Reid (Sep 13)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Alain Hebert (Sep 13)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 13)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Owen DeLong (Sep 13)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Matthew Vernhout (Sep 13)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? John Levine (Sep 13)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? LHC (Sep 13)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Jean-Francois Mezei (Sep 13)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Owen DeLong (Sep 15)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Jean-Francois Mezei (Sep 15)
- Re: Lawsuits for falsyfying DNS responses ? Jean-Francois Mezei (Sep 13)