Feeds

back to article New York sends AOL 'how-to-wiretap' slides

With his heavy-handed crusade against online child pornography, New York attorney general Andrew Cuomo has already crushed more than a little free speech, all but destroying America's connection to Usenet newsgroups. And now he's eying ISP-level porn-blocking hardware that would run roughshod over the country's wiretapping laws …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge
Thumb Down

Thanks a lot, Aussies...

...giving Cuomo more ideas!

At any rate, even if this went through, it would get shot down faster than you can say 'chilling effect'. Nice thing about a constitution.

0
0
Thumb Down

cuomo is an ignornant twat

just another stasi at another level of gubment who needs to be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. we're gonna cut off your arm 'cuz you got a wart on your finger and we're gonna save your from yourself; whether you like it or not....

typical religious right-wing nutter who thinks whatever he thinks is WAAAAYYY better than anything you could ever possibly think by yourself.

think of the chidren....well, we were, but this didn't have a damn thing to do with it...just gave us an excuse to hammer these big companies into line for the next step of monitoring everything.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Is it a wiretap?

I don't mean to be provocative, but I had thought there was some question about the statement "For an ISP to be scanning all this communication between private individuals that the ISP is not a party, that is unquestionably a wiretap." If no person is listening (reading), and the router (or some appliance) is just silently replacing flagged bytes with 0xff (or dropping the packets), does that violate privacy? (Or, more specifically, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act?) It has interfered with the reliable delivery of my mail, but nobody knows about it, so it's still private.

If the system informs somebody that my mail contained illegal content, then it sounds like unreasonable search, like body searching (for drugs) everybody who enters a stadium concert. I am pretty sure that it has been established (in some states, anyhow) that searching an entire group without specific cause for suspicion is not admissible as evidence. In the drug case, you couldn't be charged (well, convicted) legally, but you could be barred entrance to the concert.

I'm as against it as the next guy, but it's important to know where the legal eels have wiggle-room and, to an non-lawyer like me, assuming everyone on the internet collects illegal images is pretty similar to assuming everyone going to a Ted Nugent concert is carrying drugs (not expressed as a percentage, obviously). Can anybody cite a reliable reference here?

0
0
Flame

It's a good old fashioned witch hunt.

There are far greater ills in the world than child porn but it's universally reviled and makes the perfect cover for a 21st century witch hunt. The original witch trials were brought about by power hungry people who preyed on the stupidity of the masses. They whipped up hysteria about a problem that did not exist and then used it to exert their power. Anyone who questions a witch hunter is, of course, going to be labelled a witch and duly burned. The child porn laws are already overtly draconian but nobody in government dare oppose the agenda of the power crazed freaks pushing this in case they are perceived to be sympathetic to the paedos.

Surely we have more important things to spend our money on and devote our time to instead of ploughing millions into white elephants like this? There is not a paedo on every street corner and they are not hiding in the bushes wanting to jump out and attack your children, you also won't find that many of them in the internet because 90% of child abuse is done by a family member or close friend.

0
0
Silver badge
Stop

Just remember...

... You are being watched Citizen!

0
0
Anonymous Coward

RE: cuomo is an ignornant twat

He's actually a leftwing nutcase in this instance though they can be difficult to isolate when tarring with the same brush - still looks like chicken after the fact.

0
0
Bronze badge
Anonymous Coward

usenet?

I used to read comp.lang.ada -- maybe he thought it was comp.lang.lolita?

0
0

@AC #2

I believe it still counts as a wiretap even if no human actively watches what it's doing. Someone deliberately ran the program, and it probably generates log files that can be read later – like a system that automatically records phone calls. The whole thing is very similar to what Phorm does.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.