[136846] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Weekend Gedankenexperiment - The Kill Switch
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Fred Baker)
Sat Feb 5 20:17:28 2011
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <88BC6885D33A9D42A1CCB45E8749525E013CBC58@pigeon.sandiego.nextlevelinternet.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:43:14 +0000
To: Hayden Katzenellenbogen <hayden@nextlevelinternet.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 4, 2011, at 9:49 PM, Hayden Katzenellenbogen wrote:
> Not sure if it has been said already but wasn't one of the key point =
for
> the creation of the internet to create and infrastructure that would
> survive in the case of all out war and massive destruction. (strategic
> nuclear strikes)
Urban legend, although widely believed. Someone probably made the =
observation.
> Does it not bode ill for "national security" if any party could take =
out
> a massive communication system by destroying/pressuring a few choke
> points?=20
You mean, like drop a couple of trade towers and take out three class =
five switches, causing communication outages throughout New England and =
New Jersey, and affecting places as far away as Chicago?
Nope. Couldn't happen.
More seriously, yes, one could in fact take out any connectivity one =
wants by withdrawing routes (which is reportedly what Egypt did), and if =
you hit enough interchange points that could get serious.
At the risk of sounding naive and pollyanna-ish, we have a few more of =
those interchange points in the US than they have in Egypt. In theory, =
yes. Making it actually happen could be quite an operation.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JC Dill [mailto:jcdill.lists@gmail.com]=20
> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 11:39 PM
> To: NANOG list
> Subject: Re: Weekend Gedankenexperiment - The Kill Switch
>=20
> On 03/02/11 10:38 PM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
>>=20
>> And as an aside, governments will always believe that that they can
> control
>> the flow of information, when push comes to shove.
>>=20
>> This has always been a hazard, and will always continue to be so.
>>=20
>> As technologists, we need to be cognizant of that fact.
>=20
> In the US, by accident (surely not by design) we are lucky that our=20
> network of networks does not have the convenient 4 chokepoints that =
the=20
> Egyptian network had, making it easy for the government to shut off =
the=20
> entier internet by putting pressure on just 4 companies.
>=20
> Where we *really* need to be fighting this battle is in the laws and=20=
> policies that are producing a duopoly in much of the US where =
consumers=20
> have 2 choices, the ILEC for DSL or their local cableco for Cable=20
> Internet. As theses companies push smaller competing ISPs out of=20
> business, and as they consolidate (e.g. Cablecos buying each other up,=20=
> resulting in fewer and fewer cablecos over time), we head down the=20
> direction of Egypt, where pressure on just a few companies CAN shut =
down
>=20
> the entire internet. Otherwise we end up with a few companies that =
will
>=20
> play Visa and PayPal and roll over and play dead when a government=20
> official says "Wikileaks is bad" - and equally easily will shut down=20=
> their entire networks for "national security".
>=20
> If you *really* believe that the TSA is effective, you would be in =
favor
>=20
> of an Internet Kill Switch. If you understand that this is really=20
> security theater, and despite all the inconvenience we aren't really =
any
>=20
> safer, then you should equally be very concerned that someone ever has=20=
> the power to order that the internet be "shut down" for our safety.
>=20
> jc
>=20
>=20
>=20
