[105249] in Cypherpunks
RE: Response to Anonymous re: Zero-Knowledge Freedom
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Austin Hill)
Mon Nov 9 02:43:58 1998
From: "Austin Hill" <austin@zks.net>
To: "'Alex de Joode'" <usura@replay.com>
Cc: <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 02:31:04 -0500
In-Reply-To: <199811081325.OAA13192@replay.com>
Reply-To: "Austin Hill" <austin@zks.net>
Hi Alex,
The Netherlands law that I was referring to is Article 125(i) of the
Netherlands Code of Criminal Procedure (Wetboek van Strafvordering) and the
provisions that the First Chamber included in the recently passed new
Telecommunications Act requiring tapping access of Internet communications.
(Most of which I've gathered from the XS4ALL protests against these items -
http://www.xs4all.nl/spotlight/tap_e.html)
I would tend to agree that the hobby of providing remailing services might
not specifically fall under this act - but for widespread AnonymousIP to be
deployed we have attempted to leverage the bandwidth capabilities of ISPs.
This means that we rely on ISPs to operate Freedom nodes and we are mainly
concerned with this laws effect on commercial ISPs as opposed to hobbyists.
(Although anyone with bandwidth to contribute can join....there is no
requirement to be an ISP).
To do this on a large scale we have included revenue sharing and designed
our anonymous/pseudonymous system to refer most/almost all of the abuse
complaints to us. (i.e. Nym.alias.net style message with no anonymous
messages, only pseudonymous) We have designed it this way to make
operating a Freedom node an easy decision for most ISPs. It should be an
easy way to increase revenue and provide a value added service to their
customer base.
If a majority of governments do pass laws making it the ISPs responsibility
to provide the ability to tap the Internet communications, they may extend
that to banning the use of encrypted or anonymizing IP stacks. If this is
the case, it would impede our ability to have widespread deployment of
AnonymousIP in those countries. Unless they outlaw the product or
cryptography, it will not stop us though since a user can use Freedom nodes
outside of their local ISP or country.
-Austin
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Alex de Joode [mailto:usura@replay.com]
>Sent: Sunday, November 08, 1998 8:26 AM
>To: austin@zks.net; cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
>Subject: Re: Response to Anonymous re: Zero-Knowledge Freedom
>
>
>Anonymous,
>
>[..]
>: >FREEDOM servers in their home country (example: if terrible laws are
>: >passed like in the Netherlands requiring logging and storage of all
>: >packet info., etc.). In this manner, a local user in a restrictive
>
>I'm not aware of any law that requires "logging and storage of all
>packet info". (I presume you mean 'Wet Computercriminaliteit II' ?)
>
>There is a part that makes ISP liable if they cannot point to a
>'user' but the law explicitly states that you have to be in
>the business of being an ISP, running a remailer is not my business,
>it is a 'not for profit' hobby, so it will be fun to see how "they"
>will 'manouvre' to bring that also under the law ...
>
>Anyways could you please sent me the relevant parts of this law that
>lead you think this way ?
>
>bEST Regards,
>--
>Alex de Joode | International CryptoRunners | http://www.replay.com
> 'A little paranoia can lengthen your life'
>
