-
Pages
-
Categories
-
Monthly Archives
- September 2009 (1)
- March 2009 (2)
- February 2009 (2)
- November 2008 (1)
- October 2008 (1)
- September 2008 (1)
- August 2008 (1)
- June 2008 (2)
- March 2008 (1)
- February 2008 (3)
- January 2008 (5)
- December 2007 (1)
- November 2007 (5)
- October 2007 (5)
- August 2007 (5)
- June 2007 (2)
- May 2007 (2)
- April 2007 (4)
- January 2007 (8)
- December 2006 (3)
- November 2006 (2)
- October 2006 (2)
- September 2006 (5)
- August 2006 (5)
- December 2005 (3)
- November 2005 (3)
- August 2005 (2)
- July 2005 (1)
- June 2005 (4)
- April 2005 (2)
- March 2005 (1)
- February 2005 (4)
- January 2005 (4)
- December 2004 (6)
- November 2004 (11)
- August 2004 (2)
- July 2004 (1)
- May 2004 (13)
- April 2004 (2)
- February 2004 (2)
- January 2004 (1)
- December 2003 (5)
- November 2003 (3)
- October 2003 (4)
- September 2003 (1)
- July 2003 (3)
- June 2003 (1)
- May 2003 (1)
- April 2003 (1)
- March 2003 (1)
- February 2003 (2)
- January 2003 (6)
- December 2002 (7)
Monthly Archives: March 2003
Prosposed Colorado law would outlaw firewalls, encrypting your email
March 27, 2003 – 11:30 PM
I got this link from the BoingBoing blog, the originating story came from Freedom To Tinker. Essentially these proposed laws would outlaw encrypting your email, using a firewall or employing anonymizing proxies. I'm not kidding: the crucial part of the proposed Colorado legislation says: " To conceal or assist another to conceal from any communication services provider, or from any lawful authority, the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication that utilizes a communication device." Encrypting an SMTP exchange involves encrypting the entire message: the from, the to, the subject line, the body. This technically is concealing the origin (sender) of the email from the ISP (aka communication services provider). NAT's employed in firewalls (like the one built into my 3Com ISDN lan modem) also conceal the origin of originating workstations. It goes without saying that the whole purpose of an anonymizing service (like anonymizer.com) is to conceal the origin. I'm not quite sure what to make of this one -- part of me is SCREAMING it can't happen here, I don't understand this, this is ludicrous. Let's see now: applying the RFC2487 patch to Qmail will make me guilty of a felony ? Jesus -- did we just lose a war or something? I've gotten paid to apply this patch. I mention in staff meetings the benevolence of encryption, firewalls and security, and the cowboys nod without question! And now they are proposing to make it illegal? Has the whole world gone crazy?!?...
Read More